2006
DOI: 10.1080/15627020.2006.11407339
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The influence of selected environmental parameters on the distribution of the dominant demersal fishes in the Kariega Estuary channel, South Africa

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The width of the Kariega Estuary ranges from 40 to 90 m, with a water depth of 1-4 m . Sediment types differ, with the upper reaches comprising mainly coarse material deposited by the river, the middle reaches containing a high proportion of finer sediment particles and the lower reaches closer to the mouth containing large quantities of sand imported from the marine environment (Richardson et al, 2006). The Kariega Estuary is c. 18 km long, with a small catchment area (686 km 2 ) that is impounded by three major dams: Settlers, Moss and Assegai dams (Paterson & Whitfield, 1997).…”
Section: S T U Dy S I T Ementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The width of the Kariega Estuary ranges from 40 to 90 m, with a water depth of 1-4 m . Sediment types differ, with the upper reaches comprising mainly coarse material deposited by the river, the middle reaches containing a high proportion of finer sediment particles and the lower reaches closer to the mouth containing large quantities of sand imported from the marine environment (Richardson et al, 2006). The Kariega Estuary is c. 18 km long, with a small catchment area (686 km 2 ) that is impounded by three major dams: Settlers, Moss and Assegai dams (Paterson & Whitfield, 1997).…”
Section: S T U Dy S I T Ementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Comparison of impact derived from use of Catch Per Unit Effort and biomass, whereby CPUE gives a misleading impact assessment of the extralimital predator. CPUE data were taken fromBokhutlo et al (2016) andRichardson et al (2006), with unpublished biomass data from O.L.F Weyl taken fromDick et al (2017c).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although selected physico-chemical variables were correlated with fish distribution, the proportion of variance explained by the uMgeni Estuary was relatively low. Other factors such as vegetation type (Mbande et al, 2005), tidal exchange (Wilson and Sheaves, 2001), sedimentary characteristics (Richardson et al, 2006), habitat variability (Elliott and Dewailly, 1995), nutrient concentrations (Perkin and Bonner, 2014), food resource distribution (Whitfield 1980) or urbanisation (Osborne et al, 2021) may be responsible for the variation in the assemblage patterns. The greater proportion of variance explained in the uMlalazi Estuary suggests that the measured environmental variables more closely explain the assemblage composition, although other unmeasured variables may also be at play.…”
Section: Linking Environmental Variables To Fish Community Patternsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Estuaries are highly dynamic, undergoing rapid fluctuations in environmental variables and displaying distinct vertical and longitudinal gradients (Richardson et al, 2006;Medeiros et al, 2018;Connelly et al, 2020). These gradients are often more defined in estuaries with continuous freshwater and marine influences resulting from a permanent connection to the sea (Nicolas et al, 2010b;Taddese and Closs, 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%