The role of macroinvertebrates for conservation of freshwater systems

Abstract

Freshwater ecosystems are the most threatened ecosystems worldwide. Argentinianprotected areas have been established mainly to protect vertebrates and plants in terrestrial ecosystems. In order to create a comprehensive biodiverse conservation plan, it is crucial to integrate both aquatic and terrestrial systems and to include macroinvertebrates. Here, we address this topic by proposing priority areas of conservation including invertebrates, aquatic ecosystems, and their connectivity and land uses.Location: Northwest of Argentina. We modeled the ecological niches of different taxa of macroinvertebrates such as Coleoptera, Ephemeroptera, Hemiptera, Megaloptera, Lepidoptera, Odonata, Plecoptera, Trichoptera, Acari, and Mollusca. Based on these models, we analyzed the contribution of currently established protected areas in the conservation of the aquatic biodiversity and we propose a spatial prioritization taking into account possible conflict regarding different land uses. Our analysis units were the real watersheds, to which were added longitudinal connectivity up and down the rivers. A total of 132 species were modeled in the priority area analyses. The analysis 1 showed that only an insignificant percentage of the macroinvertebrates distribution is within the protected areas in the North West of Argentina. The analyses 2 and 3 recovered similar values of protection for the macroinvertebrate species. The upper part of Bermejo, Salí-Dulce, San Francisco, and the Upper part of Juramento basins were identified as priority areas of conservation. The aquatic ecosystems need special protection and 10% or even as much as 17% of land conservation is insufficient for species of macroinvertebrates. In turn the protected areas need to combine the aquatic and terrestrial systems and need to include macroinvertebrates as a key group to sustain the biodiversity. In many cases, the land uses are in conflict with the conservation of biodiversity; however, it is possible to apply the connectivity of the watersheds and create multiple-use modules.

Geographic distribution modeling and taxonomy of Stephadiscus lyratus (Cothouny in Gould, 1846) (Charopidae) reveal potential distributional areas of the species along the Patagonian Forests

“…Moreover, the protected areas in Argentina were created for the protection of plants ( Ortega-Baes et al, 2012 ) and/or vertebrates ( Tabeni, Bender & Ojeda, 2004 ; Arzamendia & Giraudo, 2004 ; Corbalán et al, 2011 ; Tognelli et al, 2011 ), ignoring the invertebrates, even when their importance has been proven ( Chehébar et al, 2013 ). This situation is a worldwide problem since there are more than a million invertebrate described species but only 3,500 are protected ( Baillie, Hilton-Taylor & Stuart, 2004 ; Brooks et al, 2004 , 2006 ; Nieto et al, 2017 ). We sustain that S. lyratus find favorable overwintering microhabitat in soil or under stones in contact with soil, which is well buffered from temperature and moisture fluctuations allowing them to survive during winter freezing.…”

An annotated checklist of Planorbinae (Heterobranchia, Hygrophila, Planorbidae) from northwestern Argentina

“…The area includes heterogeneous aquatic ecosystems, still little-studied with respect to the mollusk fauna, like lakes, marshes, swamps, and small reservoirs (78 ha of average area; Cristóbal 2005), which are located mainly in the jungle piedmont of the Yungas ecoregion bordered on the east by dry lowland vegetation of the Chaco plains. Four main river basins are present in the study area: Bermejo, Juramento, Salí-Dulce and San Francisco (Paoli et al 2011;Nieto et al 2017) (Fig. 1).…”

Primer relevamiento de la riqueza algal de una laguna de montaña del Noroeste Argentino

“…En los últimos años la atención de los investigadores se centró en la disminución de la biodiversidad en ambientes terrestres y solo muy recientemente ha aumentado la preocupación por la pérdida de especies en sistemas acuáticos. Uno de los ecosistemas más amenazados en el NOA son los de agua dulce que albergan una biodiversidad única y se han registrado elevadas densidades de su biota (Nieto Peñalver et al, 2017, Schröter et al, 2005. La escasez de inventarios taxonómicos impide que se tenga claridad respecto del real efecto del cambio climático sobre la diversidad.…”