Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-684bc48f8b-zqvvz Total loading time: 0.263 Render date: 2021-04-11T18:32:48.286Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

Distribution patterns of fish communities with respect to environmental gradients in Korean streams

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 July 2011

Ju-Duk Yoon
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, Pusan National University, Busan 609-735, Republic of Korea
Jeong-Hui Kim
Affiliation:
Department of Biology Education, Kongju National University, Gongju 314-701, Republic of Korea
Myeong-Seop Byeon
Affiliation:
Water Environment Research Department, The National Institute of Environmental Research, Inchon 404-170, Republic of Korea
Hyung-Jae Yang
Affiliation:
Water Environment Research Department, The National Institute of Environmental Research, Inchon 404-170, Republic of Korea
Jong-Young Park
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Science, Chonbuk National University, Jeonju 561-756, Republic of Korea
Jae-Hwan Shim
Affiliation:
Department of Physical Therapy, Seokang University, Gwangju 500-742, Republic of Korea
Ho-Bok Song
Affiliation:
Department Biological Sciences, Kangwon National University, Chuncheon 200-701, Republic of Korea
Hyun Yang
Affiliation:
Institute of Biodiversity Research, Jeonju 561-211, Republic of Korea
Min-Ho Jang
Affiliation:
Department of Biology Education, Kongju National University, Gongju 314-701, Republic of Korea
Corresponding
E-mail address:

Abstract

Stream development can generate environmental changes that impact fish communities. In temperate streams, the distribution of fish species is associated with environmental gradients. To analyze the relevant factors, large-scale exploration is required. Thus, to evaluate the distribution patterns of fish in Korea, sampling was conducted on a national scale at 720 sites over a 6-week period in 2009. A total of 124 fish species in 27 families were identified; Zacco platypus and Zacco koreanus of the Cyprinidae were the dominant and subdominant species, respectively. Of the species found, 46 (37.1%) were endemic and 4 (3.2%) exotic; of the latter, Micropterus salmoides and Lepomis macrochirus were widely distributed. Upon canonical correspondence analysis (CCA), both altitude and biological oxygen demand (BOD) were highly correlated with CCA axes 1 and 2, respectively. This explained 62.5% of the species–environment relationship. Altitude and stream order were longitudinally related to species distribution. The numbers of both total and endemic species gradually increased as streams grew in size to the fourth–fifth-order, and decreased in sixth-order, streams. Overall, fish communities were stable throughout the entire watershed, whereas some species showed site-specific occurrence patterns due to the paleogeomorphological characteristics of Korean peninsula. However, various anthropogenic activities may negatively affect fish communities. Therefore, both short- and long-term sustainable management strategies are required to conserve native fish fauna.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© EDP Sciences, 2011

References

Allan, J.D., 1995. Stream Ecology: Structure and Function of Running Waters, Chapman & Hall, London, 404 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balmford, A., Bruner, A., Cooper, P., Costanza, R., Farber, S, Green, R.E., Jenkins, M., Jefferiss, P., Jessamy, V., Madden, J., Munro, K., Myers, N., Naeem, S., Paavola, J., Rayment, M., Rosendo, S., Roughgarden, J., Trumper, K. and Turner, R.K., 2002. Economic reasons for conserving wild nature. Science, 297, 950953.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beecher, H.A., Dott, E.R. and Fernau, R.F., 1988. Fish species richness and stream order in Washington State streams. Environ. Biol. Fish., 22, 193202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belliard, J., Boët, P. and Tales, E., 1997. Watershed and longitudinal patterns of fish community structure in the Seine River basin, France. Environ. Biol. Fish., 50, 133147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruton, M.N., 1995. Have fish had their chips? The dilemma of threatened fishes. Environ. Biol. Fish., 43, 127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buisson, L., Blanc, L. and Grenouillet, G., 2007. Modeling stream fish species distribution in a river network: the relative effects of temperature versus physical factors. Ecol. Freshwater Fish, 17, 144157.Google Scholar
Diddle, E.D., Killgore, K.J. and Harrel, S.L., 1997. Assessment of fish-plant interactions, Miscellaneous paper A-96-6, U.S. Army Engineering Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, 23 p.Google Scholar
Eaton, A.D., Clesceri, L.S., Rice, E.W., Greenberg, A.E. and Franson, M.A.H., 2005. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 21st edn., American Public Health Association, Washington, DC, 1368 p.Google Scholar
Eitzmann, J.L. and Paukert, C.P., 2010. Longitudinal differences in habitat complexity and fish assemblages structure of a Great Plains river. Am. Midl. Nat., 163, 1432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gauch, H.G., 1982. Multivariate Analysis in Community Ecology, Cambridge University Press, New York, 320 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gehrke, P.C., Gilligan, D.M. and Barwick, M., 2002. Changes in fish community of the Shoalhaven River 20 years after construction of Tallowa dam, Australia. River Res. Appl., 18, 265286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldstein, R.M. and Meador, M.R., 2005. Multilevel assessment of fish species traits to evaluate habitat degradation in streams of the upper Midwest. N. Am. J. Fish. Manage., 25, 180194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grenouillet, G., Pont, D. and Hérissé, C., 2004. Within-basin fish assemblage structure: the relative influence of habitat versus stream spatial position on local species richness. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci., 61, 93102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habit, E., Belk, M.C. and Parra, O., 2007. Response of the riverine fish community to the construction and operation of a diversion hydropower plant in central Chile. Aquat. Conserv., 17, 3749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horwitz, R.J., 1978. Temporal variability patterns and the distribution patterns of stream fishes. Ecol. Monogr., 48, 307321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, R.M. and Gammon, J.R., 1987. Longitudinal changes in fish assemblages and water quality in the Williamette River, Oregon. Am. Fish. Soc., 116, 196209.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, R.M. and Omernik, J.M., 1981. Use and misuse of the terms watershed and stream order. In: American Fisheries Society of Warmwater Streams Symposium, 320326.Google Scholar
Hughes, R.M. and Omernik, J.M., 1983. An alternative for characterizing stream size. In: Fontaine, T.D. III and Barter, S.M. (eds.), Dynamics of Lotic Ecosystems, Ann Arbor Science, Michigan, 87101.Google Scholar
Ibanez, C., Oberdorff, T., Teugels, G., Mamononekene, V., Lavoué, S., Fermon, Y., Paugy, D. and Toham, A.K., 2007. Fish assemblages structure and function along environmental gradients in rivers of Gabon (Africa). Ecol. Freshwater Fish, 16, 315334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, D.A., Peres-Neto, P.R. and Olden, J.D., 2001. What controls who is where in freshwater fish communities – the roles of biotic, abiotic, and spatial factors. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci., 58, 157170.Google Scholar
Jang, M.H., Kim, J.G., Park, S.B., Jeong, K.S., Cho, G.I. and Joo, G.J., 2002. The current status of the distribution of introduced fish in large river systems of South Korea. Int. Rev. Hydrobiol., 87, 319328.3.0.CO;2-N>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jang, M.H., Lucas, M.C. and Joo, G.J., 2003. The fish fauna of mountain streams in South Korean national parks and its significance to conservation of regional freshwater fish biodiversity. Biol. Conserv., 114, 115126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jang, M.H., Cho, G.I. and Joo, G.J., 2005. The impact of unregulated fishing on the size distribution of a fish population in a temperate upland stream pool. J. Freshwater Ecol., 20, 191193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jang, M.H., Joo, G.J. and Lucas, M.C., 2006. Diet of introduced largemouth bass in Korean rivers and potential interactions with native fishes. Ecol. Freshwater Fish, 15, 315320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jang, M.H., Yoon, J.D., Shin, J.H. and Joo, G.J., 2008. Status of freshwater fish around the Korean Demilitarized Zone and its implications for conservation. Aquat. Conserv., 18, 819828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, I.S., 1995. The conservation and status of threatened freshwater fishes in Korea. In: Lee, H.J. and Kim, I.S. (eds.), Proceedings of Ichthyofauna and Characteristics of Fresh-Water Ecosystems in Korea, The Ecological Society of Korea and The Korean Society of Ichthyology, Seoul, 3150.Google Scholar
Kim, I.S. and Park, J.Y., 2002. Freshwater Fish of Korea, Kyo-Hak Publishing, Seoul, 467 p.Google ScholarPubMed
Kouamé, K.A., Yao, S.S., Bi, G.G., Kouamélan, E.P., N'Douba, V. and Kouassi, N.J., 2008. Influential environmental gradients and patterns of fish assemblages in a West African basin. Hydrobiologia, 603, 159169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kouamélan, E.P., Teugels, G.G., N'Douba, V., Bi, G.G. and Koné, T., 2003. Fish diversity and its relationships with environmental variables in a West African basin. Hydrobiologia, 505, 139146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuehne, R.A., 1962. A classification of streams, illustrated by fish distribution in an eastern Kentucky creek. Ecology, 43, 608614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindberg, G.U., 1972. Large-scaled fluctuation of sea level in the Quaternary Period, Nauka, Moscow, 760 p. (in Russian).Google Scholar
Martinez, P.J., Chart, T.E., Trammell, M.A., Wullschleger, J.G. and Bergersen, E.P., 1994. Fish species composition before and after construction of a main stem reservoir on the White River, Colorado. Environ. Biol. Fish., 40, 227239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, W.J., 1998. Patterns in Freshwater Fish Ecology, Chapman & Hall, New York, 784 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, W.J. and Robison, H.W., 1988. The distribution of the fishes of Arkansas: a multivariate analysis. Copeia, 1988, 358374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, W.J., Hough, D.J. and Robison, H.W., 1992. Similarities in fish distribution and water quality patterns in streams of Arkansas: congruence of multivariate analysis. Copeia, 1992, 296305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maturakis, E.G., Woolcott, W.S. and Jenkins, R.E., 1987. Physiographic analyses of the longitudinal distribution of fishes in the Rappahannock River, Virginia. Assoc. Southeast. Biol. Bull., 34, 114.Google Scholar
MOE/NIER, 2008. The survey and evaluation of aquatic ecosystem health in Korea, The Ministry of Environment/National Institute of Environmental Research, Korea (in Korean with English summary).
Moyle, P.B. and Cech, J.J. Jr., 2000. Fishes: An Introduction to Ichthyology, 4th edn., Prentice Hall Inc., New Jersey, 744 p.Google Scholar
Naiman, R.J., Melillo, J.M., Lock, M.A., Ford, T.E. and Reice, S.E., 1987. Longitudinal patterns of ecosystem processes and community structure in a subarctin river continuum. Ecology, 68, 11391156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Needbling, T.E. and Quist, M.C., 2010. Relationships between fish assemblages and habitat characteristics in Iowa's non-wadeable rivers. Fish. Manage. Ecol., 17, 369385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, J.S., 1994. Fishes of the World, 3rd edn., John Wiley & Sons, New York, 624 p.Google Scholar
Nishimura, S., 1974. Origin and History of the Japan Sea: An Approach from Biogeographic Standpoint, Tsukiji Shokan, Tokyo, 274 p. (in Japanese).Google Scholar
Oberdorff, T., Guilbert, E. and Lucchetta, J.C., 1993. Patterns of fish species richness in the Seine River basin, France . Hydrobiologia, 259, 157167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oberdorff, T., Pont, D., Hugueny, B. and Chessel, D., 2001. A probabilistic model characterizing riverine fish assemblages of French rivers: a framework for environmental assessment. Freshwater Biol., 46, 399415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paller, M.H., 1994. Relationships between fish assemblage structure and stream order in South Carolina coastal plain streams. Am. Fish. Soc., 123, 150161.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penczak, T. and Mann, R.H.K., 1990. The impact of stream order on fish population in the Pilica drainage basin, Poland. Pol. Arch. Hydrobiol., 37, 243261.Google Scholar
Ricciardi, A. and Rasmussen, J.B., 1999. Extinction rates of North American freshwater fauna. Conserv. Biol., 13, 12201222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sala, O.E., Chapin, F.S. III., Armesto, J.J., Berlow, R., Bloomfield, J., Dirzo, R., Huber-Sanwald, E., Huenneke, L.F., Jackson, R.B., Kinzig, A., Leemans, R., Lodge, D., Mooney, H.A., Oesterheld, M., Poff, N.L., Sykes, M.T., Walker, B.H., Walker, M. and Wall, D.H., 2000. Global biodiversity scenarios for the year 2100. Science, 287, 17701774.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schlosser, I.J., 1987. A conceptual framework for fish communities in small warm water streams. In: Matthews, W.J. and Heins, D.C. (eds.), Community and Evolutionary Ecology of North American Stream Fishes, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, 1724.Google Scholar
Schlosser, I.J., 1990. Environmental variation, life history attributes, and community structure in stream fishes: implications for environmental management and assessment. Environ. Mange., 14, 621628.Google Scholar
Strahler, A.N., 1957. Quantitative analysis of watershed geomorphology. Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, 38, 913920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ter Braak, C.J.F. and Šmilauer, P., 2002. CANOCO reference manual and CanoDraw for Windows user's guide: software for canonical community ordination (version 4.5), Microcomputer Power, Ithaca, 500 p.Google Scholar

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 124 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 11th April 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Access Access
Open access Open access

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Distribution patterns of fish communities with respect to environmental gradients in Korean streams
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Distribution patterns of fish communities with respect to environmental gradients in Korean streams
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Distribution patterns of fish communities with respect to environmental gradients in Korean streams
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *