3.9 Article

The influence of environmental characteristics on the distribution of ciliates (Protozoa, Ciliophora) in an urban stream of southeast Brazil

期刊

BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF BIOLOGY
卷 68, 期 2, 页码 287-295

出版社

INT INST ECOLOGY
DOI: 10.1590/S1519-69842008000200009

关键词

ciliated protozoa; organic pollution; water quality; watercourses

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this research was to study the ciliated protozoa community at three sampling stations that receive different levels of domestic sewage along the Sao Pedro Stream in the municipality of Juiz de Fora, Minas Gerais, Brazil, in order to determine the influence of organic pollution on this community and to assess the feasibility of using ciliates as water quality indicators. Four physical-chemical parameters of the water samples were evaluated: dissolved oxygen concentration, electrical conductivity, pH and temperature. The sediment was obtained manually, using dredges with capacity of 300 mL, at each collection point. Point 1 was located in a rural region that receives a low sewage load, while Points 2 and 3 were located in populated regions receiving high sewage loads. We found 22 ciliate species, of which 18 are included in the saprobic system and are considered bioindicators. These showed beta-mesosaprobic environments at Point 1 and alfa-mesosaprobic to polisaprobic environments at Points 2 and 3. The low levels of dissolved oxygen and the high electrical conductivity values at Points 2 and 3, together with the strong similarity between the ciliate taxocenoses of these points and the weak similarity between Point 1 and the other two, confirm the high sewage loads received at the latter two points. The combination of the biological indicators and physical-chemical analyses therefore proved itself to be an efficient method of evaluating water quality, and has excellent potential to support decisions on the conservation of headwaters and recuperation of degraded environments in lotic systems.

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

3.9
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