4.3 Article

Basin geochemistry and isotopic ratios of fishes and basal production sources in four neotropical rivers

Journal

ECOLOGY OF FRESHWATER FISH
Volume 16, Issue 3, Pages 267-281

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0633.2006.00218.x

Keywords

biogeochemistry; blackwater; feeding; groups; food web; trophic position

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We analysed stable carbon and nitrogen isotopic ratios of dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC), plants, detritus and fishes to estimate the relative importance of dominant production sources supporting food webs of four Venezuelan rivers with divergent geochemical and watershed characteristics. Based on samples taken during the dry season at each site, fishes from two nutrient-poor, blackwater rivers had significantly lower delta C-13 values (mean = -31.47%(o) and -32.97%(o)) than fishes from more productive clearwater and whitewater rivers (mean = -25.2%(o) and -25.6%(o) respectively). Low carbon isotopic ratios of fishes from blackwaters were likely influenced by low delta C-13 of DIC assimilated by aquatic primary producers. Although floodplains of three savanna rivers supported high biomass of C-4 grasses, relatively little carbon from this source appeared to be assimilated by fishes. Most fishes in each system assimilated carbon derived mostly from a combination of microalgae and C-3 macrophytes, two sources with broadly overlapping carbon isotopic signatures. Even with this broad overlap, several benthivorous grazers from blackwater and whitewater rivers had isotopic values that aligned more closely with algae. We conclude that comparative stable isotopic studies of river biota need to account for watershed geochemistry that influences the isotopic composition of basal production sources. Moreover, isotopic differences between river basins can provide a basis for discriminating spatial and temporal variation in the trophic ecology of fishes that migrate between watersheds having distinct geochemical characteristics.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available