Next Article in Journal
Reconstructing the Relative Ice-Flow Chronology South of Lake Mistassini in Canada from New Ice-Flow Indicator Mapping
Previous Article in Journal
Unveiling the Hydrochemical and Ecotoxicological Insights of Copper and Zinc: Impacts, Mechanisms, and Effective Remediation Approaches
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Limnological Review
Volume 24
Issue 4
10.3390/limnolrev24040025
limnolrev-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Dam Impact on Fish Assemblages Associated with Macrophytes in Natural and Regulated Floodplains of Pandeiros River Basin

by
Ivo Gavião Prado
1,2,*,
Marcela Alves de Souza
1,
Flávia Freitas Coelho
3 and
Paulo Santos Pompeu
1
1
Ecology and Conservation Department, Universidade Federal de Lavras, Lavras 37200900, Brazil
2
Pisces—Consultoria e Serviços Ambientais, Lavras 37206662, Brazil
3
Biology Department, Universidade Federal de Lavras, Lavras 37200900, Brazil
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Limnol. Rev. 2024, 24(4), 437-449; https://doi.org/10.3390/limnolrev24040025
Submission received: 24 June 2024 / Revised: 5 September 2024 / Accepted: 10 October 2024 / Published: 14 October 2024
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The impacts of hydropower plants and their reservoirs on floodplains can potentially create new environmental filters and reduce the exchange of organisms and access to habitats. In this study, we aimed to compare the fish assemblage associated with aquatic macrophytes between floodplain lakes under natural conditions and a regulated floodplain lake in the Environmental Protection Area of Rio Pandeiros, Brazil. We tested the hypothesis that in the regulated floodplain lake, there would be a lower richness and a greater of abundance of macrophytes and fish than is natural. We also verified the influence of the seasons, macrophyte bank richness, and biomass on the fish assemblage abundance. The fish assemblages differed between the regulated and natural floodplains due to the higher richness and abundance of fish in the natural floodplains. The presence of non-native and generalist species in the regulated floodplain influenced the dissimilarity between the floodplains. Migratory species have been found only in natural floodplains. Fish abundance was negatively related to macrophyte richness on the regulated lake. There was a lower fish abundance and macrophyte richness in the regulated lake. There was no evidence that macrophyte biomass affected the abundance and richness of fishes. Our results confirm that the Pandeiros small hydroelectric dam affects the fishes’ assemblage and the macrophyte community, since the regulated floodplain lake has a lower richness and abundance of fish. The regulated floodplain lake is connected to a reservoir created by a small hydroelectric dam, which will be removed in the coming years. The removal of this dam might change these dynamics, and this must be evaluated when the change is implemented.

1. Introduction

Floodplains are areas of low-lying land subjected to inundation by lateral overflow water from the rivers or lakes with which they are associated [1]. During floods, the main channel connects with the floodplains and promotes the exchange of nutrients and organisms, facilitating access to additional habitats [2,3,4]. Additionally, floods are a natural disturbance in flowing waters that play an important role in determining the structure of the river community [5,6]. Floods reduce the effect of competitive interactions and permit the coexistence of the species, increasing species diversity [3,7]. Therefore, maintaining biological diversity in floodplains depends mainly on periodic inundations and drought (flood pulse) [3,5,8].
Floodplains are highly biodiverse areas, being refugia for animals, such as fish and aquatic macrophytes [1,9,10]. They present important habitats for feeding, reproduction, and refuge in all life stages of riverine fishes [3,11,12,13]. Lower predation pressure and higher food availability in floodplains contribute to the high diversity of fishes [14,15,16] and to their use as the main nursery area for migratory neotropical fish [17].
Macrophytes are usually abundant and have high species richness in floodplains [18,19,20]. In these areas, the hydrological regime defines the life history strategies of macrophytes [21,22,23]. During the rainy season, vegetative reproduction ensures the fast colonization of the available areas [21]. When the water level decreases, most of the macrophytes’ development stops, and they pass through the dry season as seeds or spores [24,25]. Some species present higher biomass during the rainy season [26,27,28], while for others this is in the dry season [23,29]. Macrophytes act as ecosystem engineers by trapping sediments and altering flow dynamics. They are also significant components of heterogeneity and habitat complexity [30,31,32]. Roots, leaves, and stems act as visual and physical barriers, providing shelter from predation [33,34]. Macrophytes provide habitat and food resources for many organisms, such as fishes [32].
Dams cause several negative impacts on aquatic environments, such as hydrological alterations and the loss of aquatic biodiversity [35,36,37]. Most dams’ impacts in floodplains are related to downstream changes in the natural flow regime by the flow regulation [38,39]. However, reservoirs can also cause a partial or total flood of floodplains upstream [40,41], affecting their functioning as these ecosystems begin to have the water level controlled by the dam operation [42]. In terms of small hydroelectric power plants, habitat fragmentation, the homogenization of the ichthyofauna [43] and local and regional disturbances of high magnitude for the aquatic environment [44] are some of the known impacts.
The Brazilian electric matrix is mostly based on hydroelectric plants, which account for about 60% of all electricity produced in the country [45]. In the Sao Francisco River, the third-most important river basin in Brazil, fishery collapses have been linked to changes in flood intensity and frequency [46], which seem to be related to flow regulation and its impacts on the reproduction and recruitment of migratory fish. In this scenario, functional floodplains play a determinant role [47,48].
Considering the impact of small hydroelectric power plants, we aimed to compare the fish assemblage composition and structure (richness and abundance) associated with aquatic macrophytes between natural floodplains downstream of a small hydropower dam and the floodplain directly affected by its reservoir (regulated floodplain). We also verified seasonal differences in fish assemblages in both floodplains. We hypothesized the following: (1) Fish richness and abundance and macrophytes richness will be higher in the natural floodplain lakes than in the regulated floodplain, and seasonal effects will be evident only in the natural one; (2) Macrophytes richness and biomass are the main drivers of fish richness and abundance.

2. Material and Methods

2.1. Study Area

This study was carried out in the Pandeiros River, one of the most important floodplains of the upper-middle São Francisco River basin [49]. It is located in the northwest of Minas Gerais state, Brazil, on the left bank of the São Francisco River, with an approximately 145 km length [50].
Pandeiros river floodplains range between 3000 ha (dry season) to 5000 ha (rainy season) [51,52], and they are among the top priority areas for conservation in the neotropical savannah (Cerrado). These areas are considered by state law to be of “Special Biological Importance” due to their unique nature and high diversity [53]. This Environmental Protection Area (EPA) is the largest sustainable use conservation unit in Minas Gerais state, with approximately 393,000 ha [52].
The Pandeiros small hydropower dam was constructed inside the EPA in 1957 and deactivated in 2007, due to the non-approval of its operating license [50,54]. The Pandeiros reservoir is 280 ha, its dam is 9 m in height, and it has no fish passage facilities [55]. When operational, the powerhouse had a power output of 4.2 MW [55,56]. Currently, since the river flows only by the straight drop spillway, the Pandeiros dam acts as a physical barrier to the river continuous flow. As a consequence of the hydropower dam’s deactivation, downstream from the dam, the Pandeiros’ floodplain is susceptible to natural fluctuations, including the São Francisco River flood pulses near the confluence of the Pandeiros River. However, following the reservoir formation upstream of the dam, a floodplain lake was permanently connected to the river, and the dam currently regulates this environment, guaranteeing a constant water level [54]. Water depth ranges from 66.5 to 70 cm at the regulated lake and from 80 to 120 cm at the natural ones located downstream (personal observation). Since the 2000s, the dam’s removal is being studied and is planned to be held soon.

2.2. Data Collection

We sampled fishes and macrophytes in the regulated lake connected to the reservoir (15°30′02.35′′ S, 44°45′06.04′′ W) and four natural floodplain lakes in the region known as Pandeiros swamp (Veio Juca: 15°40′3.37′′ S, 44°38′5.17′′ W, First: 15°41′42.68′′ S, 44°34′41.38′′ W, Geraldo: 15°41′44.65′′ S, 44°34′20.60′′ W, and Torre: 15°40′4.35′′ S, 44°37′6.18′′ W), located at about 15 km downstream the dam (Figure 1). Collections were carried out in the dry season (July and September 2014) and in the rainy season (January and February 2015). We sampled 22 macrophyte banks at the regulated floodplain lake (12 in wet and 10 in dry seasons) and 49 at the natural floodplain lakes (29 in wet and 20 in dry seasons).
Fish were collected in macrophyte banks using a 4 m length and 1 m height trawl net with a 5 mm mesh (between opposite knots). After sampling, we anesthetized, sacrificed, and fixed the fishes in 10% formalin solution and then preserved them in 70% alcohol. We identified the fishes in the laboratory.
For the taxonomical characterization and biomass estimation of each macrophyte bank where the fishes were sampled, we used a PVC pipe 1 m2 quadrant. After being collected, the macrophytes were separated, washed, and weighed (wet weight). In the laboratory, we taxonomically identified and dried them in a drying oven (70 °C for 48 h) to obtain their dry weight.

2.3. Data Analysis

We calculated the species richness and created species accumulation curves to estimate the total fish species captured at each lake using EstimateS 9.0 (Colwell, UK, 2013).
To evaluate possible differences in the fish assemblage of regulated and natural floodplain lakes and between seasons, we performed a non-metric multidimensional scaling analysis (NMDS) using the Bray–Curtis index and an analysis of similarities (ANOSIM). In case there were significant differences, to check which species contributed to this, we evaluated the relative contribution of each fish species for the dissimilarity by conducting the similarity percentage analysis (SIMPER). We used PRIMER to perform these analyses.
We tested the relationship between macrophyte richness and biomass with seasons (wet or dry) and their condition (natural or regulated) using GLM modeled with Poisson and Gaussian distribution, respectively. We tested the relationship between the richness and numerical abundance of fishes with the biomass and richness of macrophytes and the respective effects of the seasons (wet or dry) and their condition (natural or regulated) using GLM modeled with quasi-Poisson and Gaussian distribution, respectively. We standardized the variables before performing the GLMs. We used AICc for model selection and presented the models with ΔAIC lower than 2. We conducted the analysis using R version 4.0.4 with packages Stats and MuMin [57] (R Core Team, 2021).

3. Results

We sampled a total of 152 macrophytes banks of 11 species and eight families in the natural and regulated floodplains. We found 113 macrophytes of nine species in the natural floodplains and 39 macrophytes of four species in the regulated floodplain. Egeria sp. (fixed submerged plants) and Salvinia spp. (free-floating plants) represented 47.7% of the macrophyte abundance in natural floodplains. In the regulated floodplain, Chara sp. (fixed submerged plants) and Sagittaria sp. (amphibian plants) together represented 92.31% of the macrophyte abundance (Table 1). We captured a total of 2776 fish of 30 species, 14 families, and six orders in the natural and regulated floodplains. We collected 459 fish of 9 species in the regulated lake and 2317 fish of 30 species in the natural lakes (Table 2).
The species accumulation curves from the natural lakes (First, Geraldo, Torre, and Veio Juca floodplains) showed a gradual increase in the number of captured fish species as the number of sampled macrophyte banks increased, without a clear tendency for stabilization. Conversely, the curve of the regulated lake presented a tendency to stabilize in the ninth sample (Figure 2).
Fish species composition between the dry and rainy seasons for both regulated and natural floodplain lakes had no difference (ANOSIM R = 1; p = 0.333; 999 permutations) (Figure 3). However, fish assemblage was different among the two groups (ANOSIM R = 0.508; p < 0.001; 999 permutations) (Figure 4). The species that most contributed to this difference were Hyphessobrycon micropterus, which was the most abundant species in natural floodplains, and Hemigrammus marginatus e Metynnis maculatus, abundant in the regulated lake (Table 3).
The biomass of macrophytes did not vary between seasons or conditions, but their richness was greater in the unregulated lagoons (Table 4). Despite the regulated lake presenting lower fish richness and abundance compared to the natural floodplain ones (Table 4), there was no relationship between fish abundance or fish richness with macrophyte biomass or season. However, while higher macrophyte richness was associated with higher fish richness, especially for the natural floodplain lakes (Figure 5a), macrophyte richness was negatively associated with fish abundance (Figure 5b).

4. Discussion

Our results showed strong evidence that the connection with the reservoir promoted significant changes in the fish composition and richness and in the diversity of macrophytes compared to natural floodplain lakes. However, the seasonal effects were not evident. Macrophytes biomass was not a predictor of fish richness or abundance, but at the natural floodplain, fish richness was associated with macrophyte richness. The complexity added by a higher macrophyte richness may increase the habitats heterogeneity in the floodplain [58] and it can provide the possibility of a higher fish richness. The greater fish species richness in the natural floodplain is even more evident through the patterns of the species accumulation curves. While the regional pool of species appears to have already been represented in the regulated lake, new occurrences are still expected for the natural floodplain. Despite the greater connectivity of the natural floodplains with the rest basin being evident, the role of the reservoir connection as a reducer of fish diversity in the regulated one cannot be neglected.
The whole natural flow regime for maintaining the high biodiversity of floodplain macrophytes is well known [18,59,60]. Seasonal flow and flood pulses determine the connectivity between the main channel and the natural floodplains [3,8,61]. Such diversity has been associated with the intermediate disturbance hypothesis [62], since flood disturbances may preclude competitive exclusion [7,63]. However, most of the described impacts of dams on floodplains are related to the river regulation downstream of the power plant [64,65]. In the present study, we observed similar effects through a permanent connection with a small hydropower reservoir. Lakes without water level fluctuation may present a higher dominance of competitively superior aquatic macrophytes with lower environmental requirements [20,66,67].
A partial explanation for the higher richness of fish in the natural floodplain is the higher richness of macrophytes in these environments. Macrophytes increase the environmental structural complexity, creating a range of available niches for fish [66,68]. Studies have shown that higher fish diversity is found in environments with a greater structural complexity provided by macrophytes [69,70,71,72,73]. Macrophytes benefit the structure of fish assemblages by balancing predator foraging efficiency and prey shelter needs [74,75]. Additionally, macrophytes may increase the food supply, the availability of substrate, and the spawning area for some fish species [76,77,78]. Conversely, the lower richness and abundance of fish at the regulated floodplain lake may relate to lower habitat heterogeneity and resource availability [79,80,81]. Additionally, the river stretch upstream of the Pandeiros dam has fewer fish species than downstream where the natural floodplains are located [52,81], so the fish pool differs among the regions.
Despite being subject to completely different hydrological regimes, both the natural and the regulated floodplain showed no seasonal variation in the fish fauna associated with macrophytes. Our results may have been affected by an unusual drought during the period of the study [82]. Therefore, we suggest that new samples should be carried out in the area in years with different climate conditions to confirm this pattern.
As in previous studies, e.g., [83,84,85,86,87,88], we also found different fish assemblages (in terms of richness and abundance) in the studied areas due to the damming. The dissimilarity between the regulated and natural floodplains occurred mainly due to the species Hemigrammus marginatus (generalist species) and Metynnis maculatus (non-native species) in the regulated floodplain and Hyphessobrycon micropterus (generalist species) in the natural floodplains. The creation of a reservoir has been associated with a higher proliferation of invasive generalist and non-native fish species [38,83,86,89,90]. This process occurs due to the ability of generalist species to withstand changes in the flow [91]. Invasive non-native fish species are favored in dammed habitats because they have broad environmental tolerances [92,93]. Additionally, the presence of invasive non-native species has been related to the suppression of natural disturbance regimes and the homogeneity of the habitat [94,95]. Metynnis. maculatus is a non-native species in the São Francisco River basin [96], instead being native to the Pantanal Matogrossense, a Brazilian swamp [97]. This species has rapid colonization capacity, early maturation, continuous reproduction, and small eggs [72], which are important characteristics for its success in the artificial environment created after the formation of the reservoir.
Although several studies found a relationship between macrophytes biomass and fish assemblages [69,72,73,98], we found that the biomass of macrophytes was unrelated to both the abundance and richness of fish. However, fish richness increased with macrophyte richness, but such a pattern was evident only for the natural floodplain. At the regulated one, the regional fish species pool, reduced by the reservoir creation, may limit the number of species in richer macrophyte banks. Interestingly, macrophyte richness was negatively related to fish abundance. It may be associated with the occurrence of floating macrophyte species, which, together with submerged species in floodplain lakes, cause lower fish abundance. Floating macrophytes harbor other life forms which can impose some fish sampling difficulties [69].
In conclusion, the Pandeiros small hydroelectric dam seems to directly affect the fish and the macrophyte community of the artificial floodplain lake created after the formation of the reservoir. Our results confirm our hypothesis that the fish richness and abundance and macrophytes richness are higher in the natural floodplain lakes than in the regulated floodplain. Therefore, we corroborate the literature regarding the impacts of the dam on the aquatic biodiversity and the role of the natural flow regime in the functioning of floodplains and the whole aquatic ecosystem. The removal of the Pandeiros dam, which is planned in the next few years, and the following restoration of the local natural flow regime, may allow the recovery of the currently regulated floodplain, including their macrophyte banks and associated fish assemblages. The removal must take into consideration the whole local and regional environment, and it should be properly monitored over the coming years.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization P.S.P.; methodology P.S.P. and F.F.C.; formal analysis, M.A.d.S., I.G.P. and P.S.P.; investigation, M.A.d.S., P.S.P. and F.F.C.; resources P.S.P. and F.F.C.; data curation P.S.P. and F.F.C.; writing—original draft preparation, M.A.d.S., I.G.P. and P.S.P.; writing—review and editing, P.S.P., I.G.P. and F.F.C.; supervision, P.S.P. and F.F.C.; project administration, P.S.P.; funding acquisition, P.S.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was funded by the Aneel Research & Development Program (Programa P&D Aneel) and CEMIG (Companhia Energética de Minas Gerais) P&D project GT611.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Sampling followed the national ethical guidelines.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

We thank the Aneel Research & Development Program (Programa P&D Aneel) and CEMIG (Companhia Energética de Minas Gerais) for funding the P&D project GT611. We are thankful to the department of Ecology and conservation and to the biology department of the Universidade Federal de Lavras. Andressa Mendes de Silva-Sene drew the map and helped with editing the figures. We are sincerely thankful to Ana Favaro for all the assistance and their partnership and to Silvia Millan Gutierre for their comments. P.S.P. received a research fellowship from the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científco e Tecnológico (303548/2017-7).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Junk, W.J.; Welcomme, R.L. Floodplains. In Wetlands and Shallow Continental Water Bodies; Patten, B.C., Ed.; SPB Academic Publishers: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1990; pp. 491–524. [Google Scholar]
  2. Allen, D.C.; Datry, T.; Boersma, K.S.; Bogan, M.T.; Boulton, A.J.; Bruno, D.; Busch, M.H.; Costigan, K.H.; Dodds, W.K.; Fritz, K.M.; et al. River ecosystem conceptual models and non-perennial rivers: A critical review. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Water 2020, 7, e1473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Junk, W.J.; Bayley, P.B.; Sparks, R.E. The flood pulse concept in river-floodplain systems. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1989, 106, 110–127. [Google Scholar]
  4. Reid, M.A.; Reid, M.C.; Thoms, M.C. Ecological significance of hydrological connectivity for wetland plant communities on a dryland floodplain river, MacIntyre River, Australia. Aquat. Sci. 2016, 78, 139–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Junk, W.J.; Wantzen, K.M. The flood pulse concept: New aspects, approaches and applications—An update. In Second International Symposium on the Management of Large Rivers for Fisheries; Food and Agriculture Organization and Mekong River Commission, FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific: Phnom Penh, Cambodia, 2004; pp. 117–149. [Google Scholar]
  6. Lake, P.S. Disturbance, patchiness, and diversity in streams. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 2000, 19, 573–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Simões, N.R.; Dias, J.D.; Leal, C.M.; Braghin, L.D.S.M.; Lansac-Tôha, F.A.; Bonecker, C.C. Floods control the influence of environmental gradients on the diversity of zooplankton communities in a neotropical floodplain. Aquat. Sci. 2013, 75, 607–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Shao, X.; Fang, Y.; Jawitz, J.W.; Yan, J.; Cui, B. River network connectivity and fish diversity. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 689, 21–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Pettit, N.E.; Bayliss, P.; Davies, P.M.; Hamilton, S.K.; Warfe, D.M.; Bunn, S.E.; Douglas, M.M. Seasonal contrasts in carbon resources and ecological processes on a tropical floodplain. Freshw. Biol. 2011, 56, 1047–1064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Tockner, K.; Stanford, J.A. Riverine Flood Plains Present State and Future Trends. Environ. Conserv. 2002, 29, 308–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Agostinho, A.A.; Gomes, L.C.; Zalewski, M. The importance of floodplains for the dynamics of fish communities of the upper river Paraná. Ecohydrol. Hydrobiol. 2001, 1, 209–217. [Google Scholar]
  12. Pompeu, P.S.; Godinho, H.P. Ictiofauna de três lagoas marginais do médio São Francisco. In Águas, Peixes e Pescadores do São Francisco das Gerais; PUC Minas: Belo Horizonte, Brazil, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  13. Moreira, M.F.; Peressin, A.; Pompeu, O.S. Small rivers, great importance: Refuge and growth sites of juvenile migratory fishes in the upper São Francisco Basin, Brazil. Fish. Man. Ecol. 2022, 30, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Petry, A.C.; Agostinho, A.A.; Gomes, L.C. Fish assemblages of tropical floodplain lagoons: Exploring the role of connectivity in a dry year. Neotrop. Ichthyol. 2003, 1, 111–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Quirino, B.A.; Carniatto, N.; Thomaz, S.M.; Fugi, R. Small fish diet in connected and isolated lakes in a Neotropical floodplain. Ecol. Freshw. Fish. 2019, 28, 97–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Rozas, L.P.; Odum, W.E. Occupation of submerged aquatic vegetation by fishes: Testing the roles of food and refuge. Oecologia 1988, 77, 101–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Reynalte-Tataje, D.A.; Agostinho, A.A.; Bialetzki, A. Temporal and spatial distributions of the fish larval assemblages of the Ivinheima River sub-basin (Brazil). Environ. Biol. Fishes 2013, 96, 811–822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Bornette, G.; Amoros, C.; Lamouroux, N.L. Aquatic plant diversity in riverine wetlands: The role of connectivity. Freshw. Biol. 1998, 39, 267–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Coops, H.; Hanganu, J.; Tudor, M.; Oosterberg, W. Classification of Danube Delta lakes based on aquatic vegetation and turbidity. Hydrobiologia 1999, 415, 187–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Geest, G.J.V.; Wolters, H.; Roozen, F.C.J.M.; Coops, H.; Roijackers, R.M.M.; Buijse, A.D.; Scheffer, M. Water-level fluctuations affect macrophyte richness in floodplain lakes. Hydrobiologia 2005, 539, 239–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Coelho, F.F.; Lopes, F.S.; Sperber, C.F. Persistence strategy of Salvinia auriculata aublet in temporary ponds of southern Pantanal, Brazil. Aquat. Bot. 2005, 81, 343–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Ferreira, C.S.; Piedade, M.T.F.; Wittmann, A.D.O.; Franco, A.C. Plant reproduction in the Central Amazonian floodplains: Challenges and adaptations. AoB Plants 2010, 2010, plq009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Junk, W.J.; Piedade, M.T.F. Herbaceous plants of the amazon floodplain near Manaus: Species diversity and adaptations to the flood pulse. Amazoniana 1993, 12, 467–484. [Google Scholar]
  24. Pott, V.J.; Pott, A.; Lima, L.C.P.; Moreira, S.N.; Oliveira, A.K.M. Aquatic macrophyte diversity of the Pantanal wetland and upper basin. Braz. J. Biol. 2011, 71, 255–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Warwick, N.W.M.; Brock, M.A. Plant reproduction in temporary wetlands: The effects of seasonal timing, depth, and duration of flooding. Aquat. Bot. 2003, 77, 153–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Piedade, M.T.F.; Junk, W.J.; Long, S.P. The productivity of the C4 grass Eichinocloa polystachya on the Amazon floodplain. Ecology 1991, 72, 1456–1463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Demetrio, G.R.; Barbosa, M.E.A.; Coelho, F.F. Water level-dependent morphological plasticity in Sagittaria montevidensis Cham. and Schl. (Alismataceae). Braz. J. Biol. 2014, 74, 199–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Singh, K.K.; Usha, K.; Sharma, B.M. A study on the biomass variation of the macrophytes in Poiroupat Lake, Manipur, northeast India. Sci. Vis. 2018, 18, 22–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Lycarião, T.A.; Dantas, Ê.W. Interactions between different biological forms of aquatic macrophytes in a eutrophic tropical reservoir in Northeastern Brazil. Rev. Biol. Trop. 2017, 65, 1095–1104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Tonn, W.M.; Magnuson, J.J. Patterns in the species composition and richness of fish assemblages in northern Wisconsin lakes. Ecology 1982, 63, 1149–1166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Gurnell, A.M.; Van Oosterhout, M.P.; De Vlieger, B.; Goodson, J.M. Reach-scale interactions between aquatic plants and physical habitat: River Frome, Dorset. River Res. Appl. 2006, 22, 667–680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Jones, P.E.; Consuegra, S.; Börger, L.; Jones, J.; Garcia de Leaniz, C. Impacts of artificial barriers on the connectivity and dispersal of vascular macrophytes in rivers: A critical review. Freshw. Biol. 2020, 65, 1165–1180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Savino, J.F.; Stein, R.A. Predator-prey interaction between largemouth bass and bluegills as influenced by simulated, submersed vegetation. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 1982, 111, 255–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Petry, P.; Bayley, P.B.; Markle, D.F. Relationships between fish assemblages, macrophytes and environmental gradients in the Amazon River floodplain. J. Fish Biol. 2003, 63, 547–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Benchimol, M.; Peres, C.A. Widespread forest vertebrate extinctions induced by a mega hydroelectric dam in lowland Amazonia. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0129818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Peñas, F.J.; Barquín, J. Assessment of large-scale patterns of hydrological alteration caused by dams. J. Hydrol. 2019, 572, 706–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Ziv, G.; Baran, E.; Nam, S.; Rodríguez-Iturbe, I.; Levin, S.A. Trading-off fish biodiversity, food security, and hydropower in the Mekong River Basin. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2012, 109, 5609–5614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Agostinho, A.A.; Pelicice, F.M.; Gomes, L.C. Dams and the fish fauna of the Neotropical region: Impacts and management related to diversity and fisheries. Braz. J. Biol. 2008, 68, 1119–1132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Graf, W.L. Downstream hydrologic and geomorphic effects of large dams on American rivers. Geomorphology 2006, 79, 336–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Miranda, L.E.; Habrat, M.D.; Miyazono, S. Longitudinal gradients along a reservoir cascade. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 2008, 137, 1851–1865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Tanaka, T.; Tachikawa, Y.; Ichikawa, Y.; Yorozu, K. Impact assessment of upstream flooding on extreme flood frequency analysis by incorporating a flood-inundation model for flood risk assessment. J. Hydrol. 2017, 554, 370–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Borba, C.S.; Latini, J.D.; Baumgartner, M.T.; Gomes, L.C.; Agostinho, A.A. Short-term effects in a reduced flow stretch: The case of the Antas River in South Brazil. River Res. Appl. 2019, 35, 386–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Carvalho, D.R.; Araújo, F.G. Influences of small hydroelectric power plants on homogenization of the ichthyofauna in a tropical river. Environ. Biol. Fishes 2020, 103, 757–770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Freitas, C.C.; Mereles, A.M.; Pereira, V.D.; Souza, S.F.; Hurd, L.; Kahn, J.; Morais, G.; Souza, C.G.R. Death by a thousand cuts: Small local dams can produce large regional impacts in the Brazilian Legal Amazon. Environ. Sci. Policy 2022, 136, 447–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. ANEEL. Sistema de Informações de Geração da Aneel (SIGA). Available online: https://dados.gov.br/dados/conjuntos-dados/siga-sistema-de-informacoes-de-geracao-da-aneel (accessed on 20 February 2024).
  46. Godinho, A.L.; Kynard, B.; Martinez, C.B. Supplemental water releases for fisheries restoration in a Brazilian floodplain river: A conceptual model. River Res. Appl. 2007, 23, 947–962. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Ziober, S.R.; Bialetzki, A.; Gomes, L.C.; Kipper, D. The importance of a marginal lagoon as a fish nursery in the upper Paraná River floodplain. Acta Limnol. Bras. 2007, 19, 369–381. [Google Scholar]
  48. Baumgartner, M.T.; de Oliveira, A.G.; Agostinho, A.A.; Gomes, L.C. Fish functional diversity responses following flood pulses in the upper Paraná River floodplain. Ecol. Freshw. Fish. 2018, 27, 910–919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Godinho, H.P.; Godinho, A.L. Águas, Peixes e Pescadores do São Francisco das Minas Gerais; Editora PUC Minas: Belo Horizonte, Brazil, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  50. Linares, M.S.; Assis, W.; de Castro Solar, R.R.; Leitão, R.P.; Hughes, R.M.; Callisto, M. Small hydropower dam alters the taxonomic composition of benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages in a neotropical river. River Res. Appl. 2019, 35, 725–735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Nunes, Y.R.F.; Azevedo, I.F.P.; Neves, W.V.; Veloso, M.D.D.M.; Souza, R.; Fernandes, G.W. Pandeiros: O pantanal mineiro. MG Biota 2009, 2, 4–17. [Google Scholar]
  52. Santos, U.; Silva, P.C.; Barros, L.C.; Dergam, J.A. Fish fauna of the Pandeiros River, a region of environmental protection for fish species in Minas Gerais state, Brazil. Check List 2015, 11, 1507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Drummond, G.M.; Martins, C.S.; Machado, A.B.M.; Sebaio, F.A.; Antonini, Y. Biodiversidade em Minas Gerais: Um Atlas para sua Conservação. Fundação Biodiversitas: Belo Horizonte, Brazil, 2005; Volume 2, 222p. [Google Scholar]
  54. Callisto, M.; Solar, R.; Pelegrine, D.R.; Linares, M.S. Beta diversity of macro invertebrate assemblages associated with aquatic macrophytes in shallow lakes within a tropical floodplain dammed river. Acta Limnol. Bras. 2024, 36, e32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Fonseca, E.M.B.; Grossi, W.R.; Fiorine, R.A.; Prado, N.J.S. PCH Pandeiros: Uma complexa interface com a gestão ambiental regional. In Anais do VI Simpósio Bras. sobre Pequenas e Médias Centrais Hidrelétricas; Associação Brasileira de Recursos Hídricos: Belo Horizonte, Brazil, 2008; pp. 1–16. [Google Scholar]
  56. Cachapuz, P.B.B. Usinas da Cemig: A História da Eletricidade em Minas e no Brasil, 1952–2005; Centro da Memória da Eletricidade no Brasil: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  57. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing; R Core Team: Vienna, Austria, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  58. Thomaz, S.M.; Dibble, E.D.; Evangelista, L.R.; Higuti, J.; Bini, L.M. Influence of aquatic macrophyte habitat complexity on invertebrate abundance and richness in tropical lagoons. Freshw. Biol. 2008, 53, 358–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Ward, J.V.; Wiens, J.A. Ecotones of riverine landscape: Role and typology, spatio-temporal dynamics, and river regulation. Ecohydrol. Hydrobiol. 2001, 1, 25–36. [Google Scholar]
  60. Agostinho, A.A.; Gomes, L.C.; Thomaz, S.M.; Hahn, N.A. The Upper Paraná River and its floodplain: Main characteristics and perspectives for management and conservation. In The Upper Paraná River and Its Floodplain: Physical Aspects, Ecology and Conservation; Thomaz, S.M., Agostinho, A.A., Hahn, A.A., Eds.; Backhuys: Leiden, The Netherlands, 2004; pp. 381–393. [Google Scholar]
  61. Górski, K.; Collier, K.J.; Duggan, I.C.; Taylor, C.M.; Hamilton, D.P. Connectivity and complexity of floodplain habitats govern zooplankton dynamics in a large temperate river system. Freshw. Biol. 2013, 58, 1458–1470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Connell, J.H. Diversity in tropical rain forest and coral reefs. Science 1978, 199, 1302–1310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Dos Santos, A.M.; Thomaz, S.M. Aquatic macrophytes diversity in lagoons of a tropical floodplain: The role of connectivity and water level. Austral Ecol. 2007, 32, 177–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Bernez, I.; Daniel, H.; Haury, J.; Ferreira, M.T. Combined effects of environmental factors and regulation on macrophyte vegetation along three rivers in western France. River Res. Appl. 2004, 20, 43–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Benítez-Mora, A.; Camargo, J.A. Ecological responses of aquatic macrophytes and benthic macroinvertebrates to dams in the Henares River Basin (Central Spain). Hydrobiologia 2014, 728, 167–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Cornacchia, L.; Van De Koppel, J.; van der Wal, D.; Wharton, G.; Puijalon, S.; Bouma, T.J. Landscapes of facilitation: How self-organized patchiness of aquatic macrophytes promotes diversity in streams. Ecology 2018, 99, 832–847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Roque, F.O.; Siqueira, T.; Bini, L.M.; Ribeiro, M.C.; Tambosi, L.R.; Ciocheti, G.; Trivinho-Strixino, S. Untangling associations between chironomid taxa in Neotropical streams using local and landscape filters. Freshw. Biol. 2010, 55, 847–865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Dibble, E.D.; Pelicice, F.M. Influence of aquatic plant-specific habitat on an assemblage of small neotropical floodplain fishes. Ecol. Freshw. Fish. 2010, 19, 381–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Pelicice, F.M.; Agostinho, A.A.; Thomaz, S.M. Fish assemblages associated with Egeria in a tropical reservoir: Investigating the effects of plant biomass and diel period. Acta Oecologica 2005, 27, 9–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Pelicice, F.M.; Thomaz, S.M.; Agostinho, A.A. Simple relationships to predict attributes of fish assemblages in patches of submerged macrophytes. Neotrop. Ichthyol. 2008, 6, 543–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Pacheco, E.B.; Da-Silva, C.J. Fish associated with aquatic macrophytes in the Chacororé-Sinhá Mariana Lake system and Mutum River, Pantanal of Mato Grosso, Brazil. Braz. J. Biol. 2009, 69, 101–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Gomes, L.C.; Bulla, C.K.; Agostinho, A.A.; Vasconcelos, L.P.; Miranda, L.E. Fish assemblage dynamics in a Neotropical floodplain relative to aquatic macrophytes and the homogenizing effects of a flood pulse. Hydrobiologia 2012, 685, 97–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Lopes, T.M.; Cunha, E.R.; Silva, J.C.B.; Behrend, R.D.; Gomes, L.C. Dense macrophytes influence the horizontal distribution of fish in floodplain lakes. Environ. Biol. Fishes 2015, 98, 1741–1755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Casatti, L.; Mendes, H.F.; Ferreira, K.M. Aquatic macrophytes as feeding site for small fishes in the Rosana reservoir, Paranapanema River, Southeastern Brazil. Braz. J. Biol. 2003, 63, 213–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Pelicice, F.M.; Agostinho, A.A. Feeding ecology of fishes associated with Egeria spp. patches in a tropical reservoir, Brazil. Ecol. Freshw. Fish 2006, 15, 10–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Dibble, E.D.; Killgore, K.J.; Harrel, S.L. Assessment of fish-plant interactions. In Multidimensional Approaches to Reservoir Fisheries Management; Miranda, L.E., Devries, D.R., Eds.; American Fisheries Society: Bethesda, MD, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
  77. Choi, J.Y.; Kim, S.K. Effects of aquatic macrophytes on spatial distribution and feeding habits of exotic fish species Lepomis macrochirus and Micropterus salmoides in shallow reservoirs in South Korea. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Yu, J.; Liu, Z.; He, H.; Zhen, W.; Guan, B.; Chen, F.; Li, K.; Zhong, P.; Teixeira-de Mello, F.; Jeppesen, E. Submerged macrophytes facilitate dominance of omnivorous fish in a subtropical shallow lake: Implications for lake restoration. Hydrobiologia 2016, 775, 97–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Arantes, C.C.; Fitzgerald, D.B.; Hoeinghaus, D.J.; Winemiller, K.O. Impacts of hydroelectric dams on fishes and fisheries in tropical rivers through the lens of functional traits. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2019, 37, 28–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Poff, N.L.; Olden, J.D.; Merritt, D.M.; Pepin, D.M. Homogenization of regional river dynamics by dams and global biodiversity implications. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2007, 104, 5732–5737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Souza, R.C.R.; Bueno, M.L.; Rufino, M.; Moreira, M.F.; Pompeu, P.S. Ampliando o conhecimento sobre os peixes do rio Pandeiros. MG Biota 2019, 12, 57–77. [Google Scholar]
  82. Rosa, G.R.; Salvador, G.N.; Bialetzki, A.; Santos, G.B. Spatial and temporal distribution of ichthyoplankton during an unusual period of low flow in a tributary of the São Francisco River, Brazil. River Res. Appl. 2017, 34, 69–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Anderson, E.P.; Freeman, M.C.; Pringle, C.M. Ecological consequences of hydropower development in Central America: Impacts of small dams and water diversion on neotropical stream fish assemblages. River Res. Appl. 2006, 22, 397–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Cella-Ribeiro, A.; da Costa Doria, C.R.; Dutka-Gianelli, J.; Alves, H.; Torrente-Vilara, G. Temporal fish community responses to two cascade run-of-river dams in the Madeira River, Amazon basin. Ecohydrology 2017, 10, e1889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Cooper, A.R.; Infante, D.M.; Daniel, W.M.; Wehrly, K.E.; Wang, L.; Brenden, T.O. Assessment of dam effects on streams and fish assemblages of the conterminous USA. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 586, 879–889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Liu, X.; Qin, J.; Xu, Y.; Ouyang, S.; Wu, X. Biodiversity decline of fish assemblages after the impoundment of the Three Gorges Dam in the Yangtze River Basin, China. Rev. Fish Biol. Fish. 2019, 29, 177–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Loures, R.C.; Pompeu, P.S. Temporal changes in fish diversity in lotic and lentic environments along a reservoir cascade. Freshw. Biol. 2019, 64, 1806–1820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Rolls, R.J. The role of life-history and location of barriers to migration in the spatial distribution and conservation of fish assemblages in a coastal river system. Biol. Conserv. 2011, 144, 339–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Cooney, P.B.; Kwak, T.J. Spatial extent and dynamics of dam impacts on tropical island freshwater fish assemblages. BioScience 2013, 63, 176–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Han, M.; Fukushima, M.; Kameyama, S.; Fukushima, T.; Matsushita, B. How do dams affect freshwater fish distributions in Japan? Statistical analysis of native and nonnative species with various life histories. Ecol. Res. 2008, 23, 735–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Closs, G.P.; Krkosek, M.; Olden, J.D. Conservation of Freshwater Fishes; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  92. Jellyman, P.G.; Harding, J.S. The role of dams in altering freshwater fish communities in New Zealand. N. Z. J. Mar. Freshw. Res. 2012, 46, 475–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Pringle, C.M.; Freeman, M.C.; Freeman, B.J. Regional effects of hydrologic alterations on riverine macrobiota in the New World: Tropical-temperate comparisons. Bioscience 2000, 50, 807–823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Astorg, L.; Sanderson, S.; Côté-Gravel, V.; Sorbara, F.; Windle, M.J.; Hendry, A.P.; Derry, A.M. Different refuge types dampen exotic invasion and enhance diversity at the whole ecosystem scale in a heterogeneous river system. Biol. Invasions 2021, 23, 443–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Vitousek, P.M.; D’Antonio, C.M.; Loope, L.L.; Westbrooks, R. Biological invasions as global environmental change. Am. Sci. 1996, 84, 468–478. [Google Scholar]
  96. Alves, C.B.M.; Leal, C.G. Aspectos da conservação da fauna de peixes da bacia do rio São Francisco em Minas Gerais. MG Biota 2010, 2, 26–44. [Google Scholar]
  97. Zarske, A.; Géry, K. Revision der neotropischen Gattung Metynnis Cope, 1878. 1. Evaluation der Typus-exemplare der nominellen Arten (Teleostei: Characiformes: Serrasalmidae). Zool. Abh. 1999, 50, 69–216. [Google Scholar]
  98. Dias, R.M.; da Silva, J.C.B.; Gomes, L.C.; Agostinho, A.A. Effects of macrophyte complexity and hydrometric level on fish assemblages in a Neotropical floodplain. Environ. Biol. Fishes 2017, 100, 703–716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Limnolrev 24 00025 g001
Figure 1. Locations of the natural and regulated floodplain lakes sampled.
Figure 1. Locations of the natural and regulated floodplain lakes sampled.
Limnolrev 24 00025 g001
Limnolrev 24 00025 g002
Figure 2. Species accumulation curves for the sampled floodplains at Pandeiros River, Minas Gerais.
Figure 2. Species accumulation curves for the sampled floodplains at Pandeiros River, Minas Gerais.
Limnolrev 24 00025 g002
Limnolrev 24 00025 g003
Figure 3. Non-metric multidimensional scaling analysis (NMDS) of fish assemblage at the natural and regulated floodplains during dry and rainy seasons. N = natural floodplains, R = regulated lake (Stress = 0.19).
Figure 3. Non-metric multidimensional scaling analysis (NMDS) of fish assemblage at the natural and regulated floodplains during dry and rainy seasons. N = natural floodplains, R = regulated lake (Stress = 0.19).
Limnolrev 24 00025 g003
Limnolrev 24 00025 g004
Figure 4. Non-metric multidimensional scaling analysis (NMDS) of the fish assemblage at the natural and regulated floodplains.
Figure 4. Non-metric multidimensional scaling analysis (NMDS) of the fish assemblage at the natural and regulated floodplains.
Limnolrev 24 00025 g004
Limnolrev 24 00025 g005
Figure 5. Relationship among fish richness (a) and fish abundance (b) and macrophyte richness for both regulated (dotted blue line) and natural floodplain lakes (red line).
Figure 5. Relationship among fish richness (a) and fish abundance (b) and macrophyte richness for both regulated (dotted blue line) and natural floodplain lakes (red line).
Limnolrev 24 00025 g005
Table 1. Macrophyte species sampled at the natural floodplains (N) and regulated lake (R). Life form: A—amphibian, FF—fixed floating, FL—free floating, Rf—rafted plant, and SF—fixed submerged. % NF: percentage of the species in the NF. % AF: percentage of species in the AF.
Table 1. Macrophyte species sampled at the natural floodplains (N) and regulated lake (R). Life form: A—amphibian, FF—fixed floating, FL—free floating, Rf—rafted plant, and SF—fixed submerged. % NF: percentage of the species in the NF. % AF: percentage of species in the AF.
TaxonLife FormNR% N% R
Alismataceae
Sagittaria sp.A6125.31%30.77%
Araceae
Pistia stratiotesFL3-2.65%-
Characeae
Chara sp.SF-24-61.54%
Hydrocharitaceae
Elodea sp.SF20117.70%2.56%
Egeria sp.SF23-20.35%-
Nymphaeaceae
Nymphaea sp.FF9-7.96%-
Onagraceae
Ludwigia spp.FF15-13.27%-
Pontederiaceae
Eichhornia azureaFF12-10.62%-
Eichhornia crassipesFL2-1.77%-
Pontederia sp.Rf-2-5.13%
Salviniaceae
Salvinia spp.FL23-20.35%-
Total abundance 11339100.00%100.00%
Table 2. Fish species sampled at the regulated lake (R) and natural floodplains (N). 1 Non-native species, 2 migratory species.
Table 2. Fish species sampled at the regulated lake (R) and natural floodplains (N). 1 Non-native species, 2 migratory species.
NR
TaxonFirstTorreGeraldoVeio Juca
CHARACIFORMES
Acestrorhynchidae
Acestrorhynchus lacustres---1-
Characidae
Astyanax lacustris--528-
Astyanax fasciatus589----
Hyphessobrycon micropterus625096628
Hemigrammus marginatus-316198180
Moenkhausia costae54-7765
Orthospinus franciscensis4--49-
Phenacogaster franciscoensis---2-
Psellogrammus kennedy--1214-
Roeboides xenodon3--2-
Serrapinnus heterodon1--8-
Serrapinnus piaba522671364
Tetragonopterus franciscoensis3--6-
Crenuchidae
Characidium spp.--2913
Serrasalmidae
Metynnis maculatus 11-213144
Myleus micans3--12-
Anostomidae
Megaleporinus reinhardti 2---7-
Megaleporinus obtusidens 2---1-
Curimatella lepidura5--6-
Steindachnerina elegans---5-
Erythrinidae
Hoplias malabaricus1--13
Triportheidae
Triportheus guentheri1----
Cichliformes
Cichlidae
Astronotus spp.12----
Crenicichla lepidota---6-
Cichlasoma sanctifranciscense1-5132
GYMNOTIFORMES
Sternopygidae
Eigenmannia virescens-8-61-
Sternopygus macrurus---5-
Gymnotidae
Gymnotus carapo-1---
SILURIFORMES
Loricariidae
Hypostomus sp---1-
SYNBRANCHIFORMES
Synbranchidae
Synbranchus marmoratus12-28-
CYPRINODONTIFORMES
Poeciliidae
Poecilia reticulata 112-30910
Total abundance75694881347459
Total richness1779279
Table 3. Similarity percentages (SIMPER) of fish species at the regulated lake (R) and natural floodplain (N).
Table 3. Similarity percentages (SIMPER) of fish species at the regulated lake (R) and natural floodplain (N).
SpeciesAverage AbundanceContrib. %Cum. %
AN
Hyphessobrycon micropterus1.8532.0217.7517.75
Hemigrammus marginatus33.8310.2117.7035.45
Metynnis maculatus31.521.3217.5452.98
Moenkhausia costae12.575.287.8160.80
Poecilia reticulata8.922.716.0166.81
Serrapinnus piaba1.078.945.3172.12
Eigenmannia virescens0.008.344.7876.89
Astyanax fasciatus0.008.074.6281.52
Cichlasoma sanctifranciscense6.700.423.8785.39
Synbranchus marmoratus0.005.393.0988.48
Characidium spp.2.961.672.2590.73
Table 4. Summary of best-ranked generalized linear models for macrophyte richness, fish richness, and Fish abundance (* = p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01), + represents qualitative variables included in the model.
Table 4. Summary of best-ranked generalized linear models for macrophyte richness, fish richness, and Fish abundance (* = p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01), + represents qualitative variables included in the model.
ModelsInter.ConditionS. MacrophyteR2LogLikelihoodAICcDelta AICcWeight
Macrophyte richness
0.93+ * 0.11−107.12218.40.000.62
Fish richness
1.96+ ** 0.14−171.45347.10.000.67
1.85+0.040.15−171.10348.61.490.32
Fish abundance
47.96+ ** 0.07376.5759.40.000.51
65.98+ **−7.12 **0.09375.81760.20.870.33
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Prado, I.G.; Souza, M.A.d.; Coelho, F.F.; Pompeu, P.S. Dam Impact on Fish Assemblages Associated with Macrophytes in Natural and Regulated Floodplains of Pandeiros River Basin. Limnol. Rev. 2024, 24, 437-449. https://doi.org/10.3390/limnolrev24040025

AMA Style

Prado IG, Souza MAd, Coelho FF, Pompeu PS. Dam Impact on Fish Assemblages Associated with Macrophytes in Natural and Regulated Floodplains of Pandeiros River Basin. Limnological Review. 2024; 24(4):437-449. https://doi.org/10.3390/limnolrev24040025

Chicago/Turabian Style

Prado, Ivo Gavião, Marcela Alves de Souza, Flávia Freitas Coelho, and Paulo Santos Pompeu. 2024. "Dam Impact on Fish Assemblages Associated with Macrophytes in Natural and Regulated Floodplains of Pandeiros River Basin" Limnological Review 24, no. 4: 437-449. https://doi.org/10.3390/limnolrev24040025

APA Style

Prado, I. G., Souza, M. A. d., Coelho, F. F., & Pompeu, P. S. (2024). Dam Impact on Fish Assemblages Associated with Macrophytes in Natural and Regulated Floodplains of Pandeiros River Basin. Limnological Review, 24(4), 437-449. https://doi.org/10.3390/limnolrev24040025

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop