Habitat preferences of common native fishes in a tropical river in Southeastern Brazil

Abstract

We determined in this study the habitat preferences of seven native fish species in a regulated river in Southeastern Brazil. We tested the hypothesis that fishes differ in habitat preference and that they use stretches of the river differing in hydraulic characteristics and substrate type. We surveyed fishes in four 1-km long river stretches encompassing different habitat traits, where we also measured water depth, velocity, and substrate type. We investigated preference patterns of four Siluriformes (Loricariichthys castaneus, Hoplosternum littorale, Pimelodus maculatus, and Trachelyopterus striatulus) and three Characiformes (Astyanax aff. bimaculatus, Oligosarcus hepsetus, and Hoplias malabaricus), representing approximately 70% of the total number of fishes and 64% of the total biomass. We classified fishes into four habitat guilds: (1) a slow-flowing water guild that occupied mud-sand substrate, composed of two Siluriformes in either shallow (< 4 m, i.e., H. littorale) or deep (> 8 m, L. castaneus) waters; (2) a run-dwelling guild that occurs in deep backwaters with clay-mud substrate, composed of the Characiformes A. aff. bimaculatus and O. hepsetus; (3) a run-dwelling guild that occurs in sandy and shallow substrate, composed of T. striatulus; and (4) a fast-flowing guild that occurs primarily along shorelines with shallow mud bottoms, composed of H. malabaricus and P. maculatus. Our hypothesis was confirmed, as different habitat preferences by fishes appear to occur in this regulated river.Determinamos neste estudo a preferência de habitat de sete espécies de peixes abundantes em um rio regulado do Sudeste do Brasil. Testamos a hipótese de que peixes diferem na preferência de habitat e usam trechos do rio com diferentes características hidráulicas e tipos de substratos. Realizamos amostragens de peixes, utilizando redes de espera e tarrafas em quatro trechos do rio de 1 km de extensão, compreendendo diferentes características do habitat, onde também obtivemos medidas de profundidade, velocidade da água e tipo de substrato. Quatro Siluriformes (Loricariichthys castaneus, Hoplosternum littorale, Pimelodus maculatus e Trachelyopterus striatulus) e três Characiformes (Astyanax aff. bimaculatus, Oligosarcus hepsetus e Hoplias malabaricus) que juntos compreenderam aproximadamente 70% do número total e 64% do peso total de peixes foram estudados. Classificamos os peixes em quatro guildas: (1) peixes que ocorrem em trechos com baixa velocidade de fluxo e substrato constituído predominantemente de lama e areia, compreendendo dois Siluriformes, um de áreas rasas (< 4 m, i.e., H. littorale) e outro de áreas profundas (> 8 m, i.e., L. castaneus); (2) peixes que utilizam rápidos de áreas laterais mais profundas com substrato lamoso, representados pelos pequenos Characiformes, A. aff. bimaculatus e O. hepsetus; (3) peixes que utilizam rápidos que ocorrem em áreas rasas e substrato arenoso, representado por T. striatulus; e (4) peixes de corredeiras que utilizam as margens rasas com fundo lamoso, representados por H. ...

<b>Co-occurrence patterns of fish communities in littorals of three floodplain lakes of the Orinoco River, Venezuela</b>

“…Recent models have assumed that communities are randomly assembled (Hubbell 2001); however, evidence from freshwater fish communities in tropical floodplains highlights the importance in their organization of factors such as biotic interactions (Winemiller 1996;de Mérona & de Mérona 2004;Barili et al 2011), species-habitat associations (Peres-Neto 2004;Rodrigues et al 2013) and environmental filtering (Rondón Suárez et al 2004;de Melo et al 2009). …”

Application of the physical habitat simulation for fish species to assess environmental flows in an Atlantic Forest Stream in South-eastern Brazil

“…Seasons of high flow, with larger habitat heterogeneity, mean velocity, depth and position in the water column can be fundamental to understand the habitat partitioning in the fish community, as it was demonstrated for three different fish species in Iberian streams with larger habitat variability (MartinezCapel et al, 2009). We consider that habitat partitioning is a relevant aspect of further research on the ecology of Neotropical fish communities, which could be addressed in future studies under a wide range of flow conditions (Leal et al, 2011;Costa et al, 2013;Teresa & Casatti, 2013). Physical habitat simulation encompasses characteristics of low and high water level, favoring more tolerant species in dry season, and more competitive species in wet season when a wide range of microhabitats are available.…”

“…According to Wootton (1998) heterogeneous systems supply a large variety of microhabitats with sites where fish species can shelter against predators and find a wide variety of feeding resources and places for reproduction. Recently, some studies using habitat simulation models have reinforced that physical habitat variables and cover availability determine patterns of habitat use in rivers and streams (Lee & Suen, 2012;Costa et al, 2012;Teresa & Casatti, 2013;Costa et al, 2013). However, the capability of prediction of these models depends on the understanding of how the species respond to environmental gradient conditions.…”

“…Studies developing HSCs for Neotropical fish species are rare in Brazil (Pelissari & Sarmento, 2003;Leal et al, 2011;Costa et al, 2013;Teresa & Casatti, 2013) and their results are incipient in relation to the use of such curves for physical habitat simulation to determine the minimum flow for a river or stream. Moreover, some concerns should be raised because changes in natural flow regimes are occurring in a disorderly manner, and hydrological alteration is among the main anthropogenic threats to conservation of Neotropical fish species in lotic systems (Barletta et al, 2010 (Bowen et al, 2001;Armstrong et al, 2001;Martínez-Capel et al, 2009Muñoz-Mas et al, 2014a).…”

A biophysical observation of Mahakam River around Tanjung Una of Kutai Kartanegara, Indonesia

“…Costa et al (2013) caught 1223 fishes of seven species in four rivers with different depths (> 8 m) and wide range of conditions. 70% of the fishes were caught from river with depth of <4 m and had a weight of 64% of overall weight.…”