4.6 Article

Underwater drones reveal different fish community structures on the steep slopes of a tropical reservoir

期刊

HYDROBIOLOGIA
卷 849, 期 5, 页码 1301-1312

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10750-021-04790-9

关键词

Remotely operated vehicle; Vertical stratification; Underwater video; Littoral-profundal zones; Environmental gradients

资金

  1. LIGHT ENERGIA S. A. [4600004989]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A new approach using underwater drones for fish survey in reservoirs is introduced. The study reveals the distribution differences of fish in different zones based on physical and chemical conditions, which provides important insights for environmental monitoring.
A new approach for visual fish survey in reservoirs using underwater drones (remotely operated vehicle- ROV) is presented. The ROV was applied to identify abiotic gradients and to compare fish assemblages on the steep slopes in a tropical reservoir. The tested hypothesis is that fish are concentrated in the littoral zone due to the better physicochemical and habitat conditions, compared to deep and hypoxic layers. Twelve species were recorded (seven native, five exotic), with all species occurring in the littoral zone, seven species in the transition, and four in the profundal zone. A greater fish abundance and richness was found in the littoral zone corroborating the main hypothesis. The littoral zone was dominated by exotic cichlids (Cichla spp., Coptodon rendalli), while native catfish (Loricariichthys castaneus, Pimelodella lateristriga) occupied deeper areas. The fish distribution seems to be driven by local factors, such as oxygen availability and habitat structure. The preference for the littoral zone by alien cichlids may have led to the extirpation/decrease of native characids and induced catfishes to occupy deep habitats. Underwater drones can be a valuable tool for the simultaneous collection of abiotic/biotic data, especially in deep reservoirs with complex habitats, resulting in advances in the environmental monitoring.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据