Assessment of habitat quality using macroinvertebrates and water quality parameters of a clay quarry wetland

Abstract

In this study, it is aimed to determine the habitat quality of the Bozalan quarry wetland by using diversity and a compositional index of benthic macroinvertebrates and some of the water quality parameters. The field studies were conducted in the three sampling sites chosen in the wetland three times (March, April, and May) in 2018. The standard multi-habitat method was used for the benthos sampling. Besides, water sampling was performed for the parameters measured in-situ and analyzed in the laboratory to reveal the water quality status of the wetland. Some of the diversity index values of the benthic macroinvertebrates including Shannon Wiener (H′), Evenness Index (EI), and BMWP-e were calculated. The results showed that the sampling sites were categorized into higher classes (I and II) in general according to water quality criteria of the surface waters of Turkey. Fourteen taxa of benthic macroinvertebrates were identified. The most dominant taxa were Coenagrion sp. (42.31%), Baetis rhodani (15.38%), and Physella acuta (10%) in the study area. The highest number of individuals of macroinvertebrates was obtained in March (62 ind./m2), meanwhile the highest taxa number was determined in May (10 taxa). The H′ index was reached its highest value in May (1.723), whereas the lowest value of the index was in March (1.054). The highest score of the BMWP-e was found in May (26), while the lowest score was found in April (16).

Keywords

• Secondary Wetland,
• Biodiversity,
• Community Index,
• Macroinvertebrates,
• Clay Quarry.

References

1. Anonymous. (2015). Su Kirliliği Kontrolü Yönetmeliği (SKKY). Resmi Gazete Tarihi: RG-13/2/2008-26786. Retrieved from: https://www.arcev.com.tr/images/PDF/skky2pdf.pdf
2. Anonymous. (2016). İnsani Tüketim Amaçlı Sular Hakkında Yönetmelik. Resmi Gazete Tarihi: 17.02.2005 Resmi Gazete Sayısı: 25730. Retrieved from: https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2005/02/20050217.htm
3. Bendell-Young, L. I., Bennett, K. E., Crowe, A., Kennedy, C. J. Kermode, A. R., Moore, M. M., Plant, A. L. & Wood, A. (2000). Ecological characteristics of wetlands receiving an industrial effluent, Ecol. Appl., 10, 310–322. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[0310:ECOWRI]2.0.CO;2
4. Borcherding, J. &Volpers, M. (1994). The Dreissena-monitor –1st results on the application of this biological early warning system in the continuous monitoring of water quality. Water Science and Technology, 29: 199-201. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.1994.0099
5. Bouchard, R. W. (2004). Guide to aquatic invertebrates of the Upper Midwest: identification manual for students, citizen monitors, and aquatic resource professionals. University of Minnesota, Water Resources Research Center.
6. Coffman, W. P., Cummins, K. W. & Wuycheck, J. C. (1971). Energy flow in a woodland stream ecosystem: I. Tissue support trophic structure of the autumnal community. Arch. Hydrobiol, 68(2), 232-276.
7. Dolny, A. & Harabis, F. (2012). Underground Mining Can Contribute To Freshwater Biodiversity Conservation: Allogenic Succession forms suitable habitats for dragonflies. Biol. Conserv., 145, 109– 117. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2011.10.020
8. Dudka, S., & Adriano, D. C. (1997). Environmental impacts of metal ore mining and processing: a review. J Environ Qual 26:590–602. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq1997.00472425002600030003x

9. Glöer, P. (2015). Süsswassermollusken: Ein Bestimmungsschlüssel für die Muscheln und Schnecken im Süßwasser der Bundesrepublik Deutschland [Freshwater Molluscs: An Identification Key for the Freshwater Mussels and Snails of Germany].
10. Güçlü, H., Tokoğlu, M. & Vardar, O. (2014). Biodiversity Oriented Rehabilitation Plan for Bozalan Clay Quarry. (Final Report), Ankara, 44 pp. Retrieved from: http://www.quarrylifeaward.co.il/download-final-report/274/finalreport.pdf
11. Halkman, A. K. (2005). Gıda Mikrobiyolojisi Uygulamaları. Merck, Ankara, 368 s.
12. Mandaville, S. M. (2002). Benthic macroinvertebrates in freshwaters – taxa tolerance values, metrics, and protocols. Nova Scotia: Soil & Water Conservation Society of Metro Halifax. Retrieved from: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.516.2776&rep=rep1&type=pdf
13. Mccafferty, W. P. (1981). Aquatic Entomology: The Fishermen's and Ecologists' Illustrated Guide To Insects And Their Relatives. Jones and Bartlett Publishers, London.
14. Meyer, D. (1987). Makroskopisch-Biologische Feldmethoden zur Wassergütebeurteilung von Flieβgewässern, 3. Auflage, A.L.G., 6, 3000, 140 p. Hannover.
15. Monjezi, M., Shahriar, K., Dehghani, H. & Namin, F. S. (2009). Environmental impact assessment of open pit mining in Iran. Environmental geology, 58(1), 205-216. Retrieved from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00254-008-1509-4
16. Odabaşı D. A. (2011). Sarıçay, Karamenderes Çayı, Kocabaş Çayı ve Tuzla Çayı’nın (Biga Yarımadası-Marmara, Türkiye) Molluska Faunasının Mevsimsel Değişimlerinin Araştırılması. Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniv. Fen Bilimleri Enst. Su Ürünleri ABD, (Doktora Tezi), 187 s.
17. Scheffers, B. R. & Paszkowski, C. A. (2013). Amphibian Use Of Urban Stormwater Wetlands: The Role Of Natural Habitat Features, Landscape and Urban Planning, 113, 139–149. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.01.001
18. Sievers, M. (2017). Sand Quarry Wetlands Provide High-Quality Habitat For Native Amphibians. Web Ecol., 17, 19–27, Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.5194/we-17-19-2017
19. Simaika J. P. & Samways M. J. (2011). Comparative assessment of indices of freshwater habitat conditions using different invertebrate taxon sets. Ecol Indic. 11: 370–378. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.06.005
20. Şahin, Y. (1984). Doğu ve Güneydoğu Anadolu Bölgeleri Akarsu ve Göllerindeki, Chironomidae (Diptera) Larvalarının Teşhisi ve Dağılışları. Anadolu Üniv. Yay. No: 57, Fen Ed. Fak. Yay. No: 2, Eskişehir.
21. Şahin, Y. (1991). Türkiye Chironomidae Potamofaunası, TÜBITAK – Proje No: TBAG –869 ve VHAG – 347.
22. Suding, K. N., Gross, K. L. & Houseman, G. R. (2004). Alternative states and positive feedbacks in restoration ecology. Trends in ecology & evolution, 19(1), 46-53. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2003.10.005
23. Tanyolaç, J. (2011). Limnoloji Tatlı Su Bilimi. Hatiboğlu Yayınları, Ankara, 294 s.
24. Tichánek, F. (2016). Ecology of endangered damselfly Coenagrion ornatum in post-mining streamsin relation to their restoration. University of South Bohemia Faculty of Science, 53 p. (MSc Thesis)
25. Thiere, G., Milenkovski, S., Lindgren, P. E., Sahlen, G., Berglund, O. & Weisner, S. E. B. (2009). Wetland Creation In Agricultural Landscapes: Biodiversity Benefits On Local And Regional Scales, Biol. Conserv., 142, 964–973. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2009.01.006
26. Zhadin, V. I. (1965). Mollusc of fresh and brackish waters of the U.S.S.R., Israel Program for Scientific Translations Ltd., 368 p. Jerusalem.
27. Zhang, G., Yuan, X. & Wang, K. (2019). Biodiversity and temporal patterns of macrozoobenthos in a coal mining subsidence area in North China. PeerJ 7:e6456 Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.6456