Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Biologia




More options …
Volume 64, Issue 6

Issues

Crustacean plankton abundance in the Danube River and in its side arms in Hungary

Csaba Vadadi-Fülöp
  • Department of Systematic Zoology and Ecology, Eötvös Loránd University, Pázmány P. sétány 1/c, H-1117, Budapest, Hungary
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Levente Hufnagel
  • Department of Mathematics and Informatics, Corvinus University of Budapest, Villányi út 29-33, H-1118, Budapest, Hungary
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ György Jablonszky
  • Department of Systematic Zoology and Ecology, Eötvös Loránd University, Pázmány P. sétány 1/c, H-1117, Budapest, Hungary
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Katalin Zsuga
Published Online: 2009-10-22 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/s11756-009-0202-8

Abstract

The spatial distribution and seasonal dynamics of the crustacean zooplankton were studied in the Danube River and in its side arms near Budapest, Hungary. Microcrustaceans were sampled biweekly from October 2006 to November 2007 at eleven sites. Thermocyclops crassus, Moina micrura and Bosmina longirostris added up to 57.6% of the total density. Comparisons of the different water bodies stressed the separation of the eupotamal and parapotamal side arms. Densities in the side arms were one respectively two orders of magnitude higher as compared to the main channel, which was relatively poor in plankton. There were remarkable longitudinal and transversal variations in the abundance of the major zooplankton groups (cladocerans, adult copepods, copepodites, nauplii) and dominant species (t-test, P < 0.05). However, no general pattern was observed, the spatial distribution depended on the examined objects. There were statistically significant seasonal differences in zooplankton abundance (Tukey-test, P < 0.05). Water residence time and water discharge were not found to be related to zooplankton abundance, but water temperature was positively correlated with microcrustacean density.

Keywords: Copepoda; Cladocera; bootstrap; transversal sampling; side arm

  • [1] Akopian M., Garnier J. & Pourriot R. 2002. Cinétique du zooplancton dans un continuum aquatique: de la Marne et son réservoir a l’ estuaire de la Seine. C. R. Biologies 325: 807–818. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1631-0691(02)01483-XCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [2] Amoros C. 1984. Introduction pratique à la systématique des eaux continentales francaises. 5. Crustacés cladocères. Bull. Mens. Soc. Linn. Lyon 53: 1–63. Google Scholar

  • [3] Baranyi C., Hein T., Holarek C., Keckeis S. & Schiemer F. 2002. Zooplankton biomass and community structure in a Danube River floodplain system: effects of hydrology. Freshwater Biol. 47: 473–482. DOI 10.1046/j.1365-2427.2002.00822.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2427.2002.00822.xCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [4] Basu B.K. & Pick F.R. 1996. Factors regulating phytoplankton and zooplankton biomass in temperate rivers. Limnol. Oceanogr. 41: 1572–1577. http://dx.doi.org/10.4319/lo.1996.41.7.1572CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [5] Bothár A. 1968. Untersuchungen des Donauplanktons an Entomostraca während der grossen Überschwemmung im Jahre 1965. Danub. Hung. XLVIII. Ann. Univ. Sci. Budapest. Sect. Biol. 9–10: 87–98. Google Scholar

  • [6] Bothár A. 1972. Hydrobiologische Untersuchungen im Nebenarm der Donau bei Göd. Danub. Hung. LXII. Ann. Univ. Sci. Budapest. Sect. Biol. 13: 9–23. Google Scholar

  • [7] Bothár A. 1975. Die Änderungen der Crustacea-Gemeinschaften des Planktons aufgrund der im Donauabschnitt von Göd (Stromkm 1669) durchgeführten Untersuchungen. Danub. Hung. LXXVIII. Ann. Univ. Sci. Budapest. Sect. Biol. 17: 137–146. Google Scholar

  • [8] Bothár A. 1978. Crustacea-Planktonuntersuchungen im Donauabschnitt zwischen Szob und Nagymaros (Stromkm 1707–1656). Danub. Hung. LXXXVIII. Ann. Univ. Sci. Budapest. Sect. Biol. 20–21: 249–259. Google Scholar

  • [9] Bothár A. 1980. Vergleichende Untersuchung der Crustacea-Gemeinschaften im Nebenarm „Alte Donau” und im Hauptstrom (Stromkm 1481). Danub. Hung. XCIX. Ann. Univ. Sci. Budapest. Sect. Biol. 22–23: 159–174 Google Scholar

  • [10] Bothár A. 1985. Die qualitative und quantitative Verbreitung der planktonischen Crustaceen im ungarischen Donauabschnitt von 1965–1985, pp. 283–287. In: Wiss. Kurzref., 25. Arbeitstagung der IAD, Bratislava, Slowakei. Google Scholar

  • [11] Bothár A. 1988. Quantitative und qualitative Zooplanktonuntersuchungen im Donauabschnitt oberhalb und unterhalb von Budapest I. J. 1987, pp. 179–182. In: Wiss. Kurzref., 27. Arbeitstagung der IAD, Mamaia, Romania. Google Scholar

  • [12] Bothár A. 1994. Qualitative und quantitative Planktonuntersuchungen in der Donau bei Göd/Ungarn (1669 Stromkm) II. Zooplankton, pp. 41–44. In: Wiss. Kurzref., 30. Arbeitstagung der IAD, Zuoz, Schweiz. Google Scholar

  • [13] Bothár A. 1996. Die lang- und kurzfristigen Änderungen in der Gestaltung des Zooplanktons (Cladocera, Copepoda) der Donau — Probeentnahmestrategien, pp. 201–206. In: Wiss. Ref. 1, 31. Arbeitstagung der IAD, Baja, Ungarn. Google Scholar

  • [14] Bothár A., Dvihally Z.T. & Kozma E.V. 1971. Hydrobiologische Untersuchungen im Donauabschnitt zwischen Nagymaros und Megyer (Stromkm 1695–1656). Danub. Hung. LVII. Ann. Univ. Sci. Budapest. Sect. Biol. 13: 5–18. Google Scholar

  • [15] Burger D.F., Hogg I.D. & Green J.D. 2002. Distribution and abundance of zooplankton in the Waikato River, New Zealand. Hydrobiologia 479: 31–38. DOI 10.1023/A:1021064111587 http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1021064111587CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [16] Castel J. 1993. Long-term distribution of zooplankton in the Gironde estuary and its relation with river flow and suspended matter. Cah. Biol. Mar. 34: 145–163. Google Scholar

  • [17] Dussart B. 1969. Les Copepodes des Eaux Continentales II: Cyclopoides et Biologie. Ed. N. Boubee & Cie, Paris, 292 pp. Google Scholar

  • [18] Einsle U. 1993. Crustacea, Copepoda: Calanoida und Cyclopoida. In: Schwoerbel J. & Zwick P. (eds), Süsswasserfauna von Mitteleuropa, Bd. 8, Heft 4, Teil 1, Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart, 208 pp. Google Scholar

  • [19] Gulyás P. 1994. Studies on the Rotatorian and Crustacean plankton in the Hungarian section of the Danube between 1848,4 and 1659,0 riv. km, pp. 49–61. In: Kinzelbach R. (ed.), Biologie der Donau, Gustav Fischer, Stuttgart. Google Scholar

  • [20] Gulyás P. 1995. Rotatoria and Crustacea plankton of the River Danube between Bratislava and Budapest. Misc. Zool. Hung. 10: 7–19. Google Scholar

  • [21] Gulyás P. 1997. Untersuchungen des Rotatoria- und Crustacea-Planktons an der Donaustrecke unterhalb Budapest sowie im Donauarm Ráckevei-Soroksári Duna (RSD), pp. 265–270. In: Wiss. Ref. 1, 32. Arbeitstagung der IAD, Wien, Österreich. Google Scholar

  • [22] Gulyás P. 2002. A Rotatoria és Crustacea plankton minőségi és mennyiségi vizsgálata a Dunán. Vízügyi Közl. 84: 601–620. Google Scholar

  • [23] Gulyás P. & Forró L. 1999. Az ágascsápú rákok (Cladocera) kishatározója, 2. bővített kiadás. Vízi Természet- és Környezetvédelem, 9. kötet, Környezetgazdálkodási Intézet, Budapest, 237 pp. Google Scholar

  • [24] Gulyás P. & Forró L. 2001. Az evezőlábú rákok (Calanoida és Cyclopoida) alrendjeinek kishatározója, 2. bővített kiadás. Vízi Természet- és Környezetvédelem, 14. kötet, Környezetgazdálkodási Intézet, Budapest, 198 pp. Google Scholar

  • [25] Hammer O.D., Harper A.T. & Ryan P.D. 2001. PAST: Paleontological Statistics software package for education and data analysis. Paleont. Electron. 4(1): 1–9. Google Scholar

  • [26] Ietswaart T.H., Breebaart L., Van Zanten B. & Bijkerk R. 1999. Plankton dynamics in the river Rhine during downstream transport as influenced by biotic interactions and hydrological conditions. Hydrobiologia 410: 1–10. DOI 10.1023/A:1003801110365 http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1003801110365CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [27] Illyová M. & Némethová D. 2005. Long-term changes in cladoceran assemblages in the Danube floodplain area (Slovak-Hungarian stretch). Limnologica 35: 274–282. DOI 10.1016/j.limno.2005.08.004 CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [28] Just I., Schöll F. & Tittizer T. (ed.) 1998. Versuch einer Harmonisierung nationaler Methoden zur Bewertung der Gewassergüte im Donauarm am Beispiel der Abwasser der Stadt Budapest. Umweltbundesamt, Berlin, Texte 53/98, 65 pp. Google Scholar

  • [29] Kim H.W. & Joo G.J. 2000. The longitudinal distribution and community dynamics of zooplankton in a regulated large river: a case study of the Nakdong River (Korea). Hydrobiologia 438: 171–184. DOI 10.1023/A:1004185216043 http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1004185216043CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [30] Kobayashi T., Shiel R.J., Gibbs P. & Dixon P.I. 1998. Freshwater zooplankton in the Hawkesbury-Nepean River: comparison of community structure with other rivers. Hydrobiologia 377: 133–145. DOI 10.1023/A:1003240511366 http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1003240511366CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [31] Lair N. 2006. A review of regulation mechanisms of metazoan plankton in riverine ecosystems: aquatic habitat versus biota. Riv. Res. Appl. 22: 567–593. DOI 10.1002/rra.923 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rra.923CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [32] Maria-Heleni Z., Michaloudi E., Bobori D.C. & Mourelatos S. 2000. Zooplankton abundance in the Aliakmon River, Greece. Belg. J. Zool. 130: 29–33. Google Scholar

  • [33] Mitsuka P.M. & Henry R. 2002. The fate of copepod populations in the Paranapanema River (Sao Paulo, Brazil), downstream from the Jurumirim dam. Braz. Arch. Biol. Technol. 45: 479–490. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1516-89132002000600012CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [34] Naidenow W. 1971. Zustand und Perspektiven der Untersuchungen über das Zooplankton der Donau, ihrer Nebenflüsse und der stehenden Gewässer. Schweiz. Z. Hydrol. 33: 314–321. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02503996CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [35] Naidenow W. 1979. Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis des Zooplanktons der ungarischen Donau. Hidrobiologiya 9: 38–43. Google Scholar

  • [36] Naidenow W. 1998. Das Zooplankton der Donau, pp. 163–248. In: Kusel-Fetzmann E., Naidenow W. & Russev B. (eds), Plankton und Benthos der Donau, Ergebnisse der Donau-Forschung, Band 4, Wien. Google Scholar

  • [37] Obertegger U., Flaim G., Braioni M.G., Sommaruga R., Corradini F. & Borsato A. 2007. Water residence time as a driving force of zooplankton structure and succession. Aquat. Sci. 69: 575–583. DOI 10.1007/s00027-007-0924-z http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00027-007-0924-zCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [38] Onwudinjo C.C. & Egborge A.B.M. 1994. Rotifers of Benin River, Nigeria. Hydrobiologia 272: 87–94. DOI 10.1007/BF00006514 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00006514CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [39] Pace M.L., Findlay S.E.G. & Lints D. 1992. Zooplankton in advective environments: the Hudson River community and a comparative analysis. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 49: 1060–1069. http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/f92-117CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [40] Ponyi E. 1962. Beiträge zur Kenntnis des Crustaceen-Planktons der ungarischen Donau (Danub. Hung. XIV.). Opusc. Zool. Budapest 4: 127–132. Google Scholar

  • [41] Pourriot R., Rougier C. & Miquelis A. 1997. Origin and development of river zooplankton: example of the Marne. Hydrobiologia 345: 143–148. DOI 10.1023/A:1002935807795 http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1002935807795CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [42] Reckendorfer W., Keckeis H., Winkler G. & Schiemer F. 1999. Zooplankton abundance in the River Danube, Austria: the significance of inshore retention. Freshwater Biol. 41: 583–591. DOI 10.1046/j.1365-2427.1999.00412.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2427.1999.00412.xCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [43] Sabri A.W., Ali Z.H., Shawkat S.F., Thejar L.A., Kassim T.I. & Rasheed K.A. 1993. Zooplankton population in the river Tigris — effects of Samarra impoundment. Reg. Riv. Res. Manage. 8: 237–250. DOI 10.1002/rrr.3450080304 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rrr.3450080304CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [44] Saunders J.F. & Lewis W.M. 1988. Zooplankton abundance and transport in a tropical white-water river. Hydrobiologia 162: 147–155. DOI 10.1007/BF00014537 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00014537CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [45] Saunders J.F. & Lewis W.M. 1989. Zooplankton abundance in the lower Orinoco River, Venezuela. Limnol. Oceanogr. 34: 397–409. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [46] Schiemer F., Keckeis H., Reckendorfer W. & Winkler G. 2001. The inshore retention concept and its significance for large rivers. Arch. Hydrobiol. 135: 509–516. Google Scholar

  • [47] Soballe D.M. & Kimmel B.L. 1987. A large-scale comparison of factors influencing phytoplankton abundance in rivers, lakes, and impoundments. Ecology 68: 1943–1954. DOI 10.2307/1939885 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1939885CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [48] Thorp J.H. & Casper A.F. 2003. Importance of biotic interactions in large rivers: an experiment with planktonivorous fish, dreissenid mussels and zooplankton in the St Lawrence River. Riv. Res. Appl. 19: 265–279. DOI 10.1002/rra.703 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rra.703CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [49] Thorp J.H. & Mantovani S. 2005. Zooplankton of turbid and hydrologically dynamic prairie rivers. Freshwater Biol. 50: 1474–1491. DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2427.2005.01422.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2427.2005.01422.xCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [50] Thorp J.H., Black A.R., Haag K.H & Wehr J.D. 1994. Zooplankton assemblages in the Ohio River: seasonal, tributary, and navigation dam effects. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 51: 1634–1643. DOI 10.1139/f94-164 http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/f94-164CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [51] Van M. Dijk & Van Zanten B. 1995. Seasonal changes in zooplankton abundance in the lower Rhine during 1987–1991. Hydrobiologia 304: 29–38. DOI 10.1007/BF2530701 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02530701CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [52] Vranovský M. 1997. Impact of the Gabcikovo hydropower plant operation on planktonic copepods assemblages in the River Danube and its floodplain downstream of Bratislava. Hydrobiologia 347: 41–49. DOI 10.1023/A:1002990705205 http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1002990705205CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [53] Zsuga K., Tóth A., Pekli J. & Udvari Z. 2004. A Tisza vízgyüjtő zooplanktonjának alakulása az 1950-es évektől napjainkig. Hidrol. Közl. 84: 175–178. Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2009-10-22

Published in Print: 2009-12-01


Citation Information: Biologia, Volume 64, Issue 6, Pages 1184–1195, ISSN (Online) 1336-9563, ISSN (Print) 0006-3088, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/s11756-009-0202-8.

Export Citation

© 2009 Slovak Academy of Sciences. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License. BY-NC-ND 3.0

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
Robert Czerniawski, Małgorzata Pilecka-Rapacz, and Józef Domagała
Open Life Sciences, 2013, Volume 8, Number 1
[2]
Csaba Vadadi-Fülöp
Hydrobiologia, 2013, Volume 702, Number 1, Page 129

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in