4.7 Article

Do laboratory salinity tolerances of freshwater animals correspond with their field salinity?

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION
卷 129, 期 3, 页码 355-362

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2003.12.005

关键词

validation; ecotoxicity; salinity; electrical conductivity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

this paper we compare laboratory-derived acute salinity tolerance (LC50 values) of freshwater macroinvertebrates (range 5.5-76 mS/cm) and fish (range 2.7-82 mS/cm) from southeastern Australia with the salinity from which they have been collected in the field. Only 4% of the macroinvertebrates were collected at salinity levels substantially higher than their 72-h LC50 obtained from directly transferring animals from low salinity water to the water they were tested (direct transfer LC50). This LC50 value was correlated with the maximum salinity at which a species had been collected. For common macroinvertebrates, the maximum field salinity was approximated by the direct transfer 72-h LC50. For adult freshwater fish, 21% of species were collected at salinities substantially greater than their acute direct transfer LC50 and there was a weak relationship between these two variables. Although there was a weak correlation between the direct transfer LC50 of early life stages of freshwater fish and the maximum field salinity, 58% of the field distribution were in higher than their LC50 values. In contrast, LC50 determined from experiments that acclimated adult fish to higher salinity (slow acclimation) provided a better indication of the field distribution: with only one fish species (7%) being in conflict with their maximum field salinity and a strong positive relationship between these variables. This study shows that laboratory measures of acute salinity tolerance can reflect the maximum salinity that macroinvertebrate and fish species inhabit and are consistent with some anecdotal observations from other studies. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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