The macrophyte vegetation of running waters in the North-East of Italy [Elektronische Ressource] : a study of the influence of morphological variables and chemical parameters on the aquatic plant community / Margherita Fabris

Margherita Leoni

Sujets

• Naturwissenschaften

Informations

• Publié par: technische_universitat_munchen
• Publié le: 01 janvier 2010
• Nombre de lectures: 19
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 5 Mo

Extrait

UNIVERSITÀ CA’ FOSCARI VENEZIA (Italien), Dipartimento di Scienze Ambientali

und

TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITÄT MÜNCHEN, Fachbereich Limnologie


- im Rahmen des Doppelpromotionsabkommens vom 18.05.2007 -






The macrophyte vegetation of running waters in the North-East of Italy:
a study of the influence of morphological variables and chemical parameters
on the aquatic plant community



Margherita Fabris




Vollständiger Abdruck der von der Fakultät Wissenschaftszentrum Weihenstephan für
Ernährung, Landnutzung und Umwelt der Technischen Universität München zur Erlangung
des akademischen Grades eines

Doktors der Naturwissenschaften

genehmigten Dissertation.







Vorsitzender: Prof. Bruno Pavoni, Università Ca´ Foscari Venezia (Italien)


Prüfer der Dissertation:

1. Prof. Pier Francesco Ghetti, Università Ca’ Foscari di Venezia (Italien)
2. Prof. Giampaolo Rossetti, Università di Parma (Italien)
3. Univ-Prof. Dr. Arnulf Melzer, TU München (Deutschland)
4. Univ.-Prof. Dr. Wilfried Huber, TU München (Deutschland)


INDEX

1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Macrophyte methods: the international context ............................................................. 2
1.2 Macrophyte methods: the Italian context ....................................... 4
2 WHAT ARE MACROPHYTES? ......................... 6
2.1 Classification of aquatic plants ...................................................................................... 6
3 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS AFFECTING MACROPHYTE GROWTH AND
DISTRIBUTION ................................................................................................................. 9
3.1 Light availability ............................................ 9
3.2 Substratum type ............. 9
3.3 Flow rate ...................................................... 10
3.4 Water chemistry ........... 10
3.4.1 Dissolved oxygen and carbon dioxide 10
3.4.2 pH, hardness and conductivity ............................................................................ 11
3.4.3 Nitrogen and phosphorus .................................................................................... 11
3.5 Biotic factors ................................................ 12
3.6 Other factors 14
4 INFLUENCE OF MACROPHYTES ON RIVER ENVIRONMENT ............................... 15
5 STUDY AREA ................................................... 17
5.1 The Po basin ................................................................................................................. 19
5.1.1 The River Sarca .................................. 19
5.1.2 The River Chiese ................................................................................................. 22
5.2 The Adige basin ........... 24
5.2.1 The Adige in San Michele all’Adige ................................................................... 25
5.2.2 The Adige in Trento ............................................................................................ 25
5.2.3 The Adige in Villa Lagarina ............... 25
5.2.4 The Adige in Mori ............................................................................................... 25
5.2.5 The Adige in Borghetto ....................... 26
5.2.6 The Fossa di Caldaro ......................................................................................... 26
5.2.7 The Fossa di Salorno .......................... 26
5.2.8 The Rio S. Zeno ................................................................... 26
5.2.9 The Rio Lavisotto ................................................................................................ 27
5.2.10 The Rio Salé ........ 27
5.2.11 The Leno ............................................................................................................. 27
5.2.12 The Noce 28
5.3 The Brenta – Bacchiglione basin ................................................................................. 30
5.3.1 The River Brenta ................................. 30
5.3.2 The River Bacchiglione ....................... 34
5.3.3 The Fratta – Gorzone basin ................................................................................ 37
6 MATERIALS AND METHODS ........................................................................................ 38
6.1 Selection of sampling sites .......................... 38
6.2 Site mapping ................................................ 38
I6.2.1 Timing of surveys................................................................................................ 38
6.2.2 Macrophyte mapping .......................................................................................... 39
6.2.3 Site feature assessment ....................................................... 41
6.3 Water chemistry .......................................... 42
6.4 Raw data treatment ...................................................................................................... 43
6.5 Statistical data treatment ............................................................. 46
6.6 Community structure metrics ...................................................................................... 49
6.7 The macrophyte indexes .............................................................. 51
7 RESULTS .................................................... 53
7.1 Macrophyte Community................................53
7.2 Site features ................................................................................. 58
7.3 Water Chemistry.......................................... 59
7.4 Similarity Indexes........................................................................................................ 62
7.5 Cluster Analysis based on Euclidean distance ............................ 69
7.6 Shannon-Weaver Diversity Index, Evenness and other metrics ................................. 76
7.7 Matching-two-table analysis: species abundance and site chemical parameters ........ 81
7.8 Matching-two-table analysis: species abundance and site features ............................. 88
7.9 Matching-two-table analysis: species abundance, chemical parameters and site
features ........................................................................................................................ 96
7.10 Classification of river types ....................................................................................... 100
7.11 Correlation between species abundances and nutrients ............................................ 103
7.12 Correlation between species presence-absence and nutrients ................................... 105
7.13 Application of the IBMR ........................................................................................... 107
8 DISCUSSION .................................................. 112
9 CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................. 127
10 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 128
11 APPENDIX .................................................. 149
11.1 Sampling data sheet: Macrophytes – Running Waters .............................................. 149
11.2 Species abundance matrix ......................... 153
11.3 Site feature matrix ..................................... 155
11.4 Similarity Matrix: Bray-Curtis Index and Morisita Index on Species Abundance
data ............................................................................................................................ 157
11.5 Similarity Matrix: Bray-Curtis Index and Raup-Crick Index on Species
Presence/Absence data .............................. 158
11.6 Cluster dendrograms of species ................................................................................. 159
12 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................ 161
13 ABSTRACT .................................................... III
14 RIASSUNTO ..................... V
15 ZUSAMMENFASSUNG ..................................................................................................VII

II 1 INTRODUCTION

In the past few years the approach to river assessment has radically changed. The
attention of ecologists shifted from the water to the whole river. If we want to analyse a
river, we will not consider only the chemical and biological quality of the water, as it
used to be done some years ago, but we will try to evaluate the health of the entire
ecosystem, using as many descriptors as possible.
This kind of cultural variation has become definitively explicit with the introduction in
Europe of the Water Framework Directive (WFD). The Directive requires the
ecological assessment of running waters based on various biotic elements, like
macrozoobenthos, diatoms, macrophytes, fishes and phytobenthos (EC, 2000). In all
European countries one of the consequences of the WFD was the creation or the
improvement of methods to a