Find research datasets worth reusing

opennotspecifiedAug 2024View details →

Arctic Biodiversity: Arctic Freshwater Fishes

Biogeography and other attributes for Arctic organisms, various sources.Meltofte, H. (ed.) 2013. Arctic Biodiversity Assessment. Status and trends in Arctic biodiversity. Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna, Akureyri. https://arcticbiodiversity.is/index.php/the-report/chapters/fishes

opencc-by-4.0Oct 2022View details →

FIGURE 4 in Freshwater fishes of the Río de la Plata: current assemblage structure

FIGURE 4 | Figure caption on next page.

Code for Manuscript - Near-term lake water temperature forecasts can be used to anticipate the ecological dynamics of freshwater species -

Code for Manuscript - Near-term lake water temperature forecasts can be used to anticipate the ecological dynamics of freshwater species -

Data and code from: Species interactions drive continuous assembly of freshwater communities in stochastic environments

Understanding the factors driving the maintenance of long-term biodiversity in changing environments is essential for improving restoration and sustainability strategies in the face of global environmental change. Biodiversity is shaped by both niche and stochastic processes, however the strength of deterministic processes in unpredictable environmental regimes is highly debated. Since communities continuously change over time and space -- species persist, disappear or (re)appear -- understanding the drivers of species gains and losses from communities should inform us about whether niche or stochastic processes dominate community dynamics. Applying a nonparametric causal discovery approach to a 30-year time series containing annual abundances of benthic invertebrates across 66 locations in New Zealand rivers, we found a strong \hl{negative} causal relationship between species gains and losses directly driven by predation indicating that niche processes dominate community dynamics. Despite the unpredictable nature of these system, environmental noise was only indirectly related to species gains and losses through altering life history trait distribution. Using a stochastic birth-death framework, we demonstrate that the negative relationship between species gains and losses can not emerge without strong niche processes. Our results showed that even in systems that are dominated by unpredictable environmental variability, species interactions drive continuous community assembly.

opencc-by-4.0May 2024View details →

The influence of food web structure and foraging behaviour on visual system traits in a predatory freshwater fish

Dataset used in the manuscript titled "The influence of food web structure and foraging behaviour on visual system traits in a predatory freshwater fish" Dataset includes lake trout visual system traits, body size, and food web structural attributes sampled from four different lakes in Algonquin, ON, Canada.

RAD-seq generated single nucleotide polymorphisms resolve patterns of genetic diversity and structure of the freshwater mussel Ptychobranchus fasciolaris in glaciated and unglaciated regions of North America

Included are the initial unfiltered SNP output from the STACKS pipeline, and the final filtered SNP dataset in VCF format used to do analysis in the manuscript titled "RAD-seq generated single nucleotide polymorphisms resolve patterns of genetic diversity and structure of the freshwater mussel Ptychobranchus fasciolaris in glaciated and unglaciated regions of North America" which was submitted to Hydrobiologia in September 2024.

opencc-by-4.0Jan 2024View details →

Table 1 in Risk screening of non-native freshwater fishes in Yunnan Province, China

Table 1. Non-native freshwater fish (with taxonomy) screened for their risk of invasiveness in Yunnan Province with the Aquatic Species Invasiveness Screening Kit (AS-ISK)<table><tbody><tr><th>Order</th><th>Family</th><th>Taxon name</th><th>Common name</th><th>A priori categorisation</th><th>Native region</th></tr></tbody><tbody><tr><th>Anguilliformes</th><td>Anguillidae</td><td>Anguilla anguilla</td><td>European eel</td><td>Non-invasive</td><td>Europe</td></tr><tr><td>Anguilla japonica</td><td>Japanese eel</td><td>Non-invasive</td><td>Asia</td></tr><tr><th>Acipenseriformes</th><td>Acipenseridae</td><td>Acipenser baerii</td><td>Siberian sturgeon</td><td>Invasive</td><td>Europe, Asia</td></tr><tr><th>Beloniformes</th><td>Hemiramphidae</td><td>Hyporhamphus intermedius</td><td>Asian pencil halfbeak</td><td>Non-invasive</td><td>China, Japan</td></tr><tr><th>Centrarchiformes</th><td>Centrarchidae</td><td>Micropterus salmoides</td><td>Largemouth bass</td><td>Invasive</td><td>North America</td></tr><tr><th>Characiformes</th><td>Serrasalmidae</td><td>Piaractus brachypomus</td><td>Pirapitinga</td><td>Invasive</td><td>Brazil, Colombia</td></tr><tr><td>Prochilo-dontidae</td><td>Prochilodus lineatus</td><td>Streaked prochilod</td><td>Non-invasive</td><td>Brazil, Chile</td></tr><tr><td>Cyprinidae</td><td>Acheilognathus chankaensis</td><td>Xingkai bitterling</td><td>Non-invasive</td><td>China</td></tr><tr><td>Acheilognathus macropterus</td><td>Largefin bitterling</td><td>Non-invasive</td><td>China</td></tr><tr><td>Carassius cuvieri</td><td>Japanese white crucian carp</td><td>Invasive</td><td>Japan</td></tr><tr><td>Ctenopharyngodon idella</td><td>Grass carp</td><td>Invasive</td><td>China</td></tr><tr><td>Cultrichthys erythropterus</td><td>Redfin culter</td><td>Non-invasive</td><td>China</td></tr><tr><td>Hypophthalmichthys molitrix</td><td>Silver carp</td><td>Invasive</td><td>China</td></tr><tr><td>Hypophthalmichthys nobilis</td><td>Bighead carp</td><td>Invasive</td><td>China</td></tr><tr><td>Labeo rohita</td><td>Roho labeo</td><td>Non-invasive</td><td>India, Myanmar</td></tr><tr><td>Megalobrama amblycephala</td><td>Wuchang bream</td><td>Non-invasive</td><td>China</td></tr><tr><td>Mylopharyngodon piceus</td><td>Black carp</td><td>Invasive</td><td>China</td></tr><tr><td>Parabramis pekinensis</td><td>White Amur bream</td><td>Non-invasive</td><td>China</td></tr><tr><td>Cobitidae</td><td>Paramisgurnus dabryanus</td><td>Taiwaninmutakala</td><td>Non-invasive</td><td>China</td></tr><tr><td>Cyprinidae</td><td>Sarcocheilichthys nigripinnis</td><td>Rainbow gudgeon</td><td>Non-invasive</td><td>China</td></tr><tr><td>Tinca tinca</td><td>Tench</td><td>Invasive</td><td>Europe</td></tr><tr><td>Toxabramis swinhonis</td><td>Thin sharpbelly</td><td>Non-invasive</td><td>China</td></tr><tr><th>Cyprinodontiformes</th><td>Poeciliidae</td><td>Gambusia affinis</td><td>Western mosquitofish</td><td>Invasive</td><td>America</td></tr><tr><th>Osmeriformes</th><td>Osmeridae</td><td>Hypomesus olidus</td><td>Pond smelt</td><td>Non-invasive</td><td>China, Japan</td></tr><tr><td>Salangidae</td><td>Neosalanx taihuensis</td><td>Taihu icefish</td><td>Invasive</td><td>China</td></tr><tr><td>Protosalanx hyalocranius</td><td>Clearhead icefish</td><td>Non-invasive</td><td>China</td></tr><tr><th>Perciformes</th><td>Cichlidae</td><td>Oreochromis aureus</td><td>Blue tilapia</td><td>Invasive</td><td>Africa</td></tr><tr><td>Oreochromis mossambicus</td><td>Mozambique tilapia</td><td>Invasive</td><td>Africa</td></tr><tr><td>Oreochromis niloticus</td><td>Nile tilapia</td><td>Invasive</td><td>Africa</td></tr><tr><td>Gobiidae</td><td>Rhinogobius cliffordpopei</td><td>Goby</td><td>Invasive</td><td>China</td></tr><tr><td>Sinipercidae</td><td>Siniperca chuatsi</td><td>Chinese perch</td><td>Non-invasive</td><td>China</td></tr><tr><th>Salmoniformes</th><td>Salmonidae</td><td>Oncorhynchus mykiss</td><td>Rainbow trout</td><td>Invasive</td><td>North America</td></tr><tr><td>Salmo trutta</td><td>Brown trout</td><td>Invasive</td><td>Europe</td></tr><tr><th>Siluriformes</th><td>Ictaluridae</td><td>Ameiurus nebulosus</td><td>Brown bullhead</td><td>Invasive</td><td>Canada, America</td></tr><tr><td>Clariidae</td><td>Clarias gariepinus</td><td>North African catfish</td><td>Invasive</td><td>Africa</td></tr><tr><td>Loricariidae</td><td>Hypostomus plecostomus</td><td>Suckermouth catfish</td><td>Invasive</td><td>South America</td></tr><tr><td>Ictaluridae</td><td>Ictalurus punctatus</td><td>Channel catfish</td><td>Invasive</td><td>North American</td></tr></tbody></table>

opencc-by-4.0Jan 2024View details →

Table 2 in Risk screening of non-native freshwater fishes in Yunnan Province, China

Table 2. Non-native freshwater fish species assessed with the Aquatic Species Invasiveness Screening Kit (AS-ISK) for Yunnan Province<table><tbody><tr><th>Species name</th><th>A priori categorisation</th><th>Screening component</th><th></th><th>Confidence</th></tr><tr><th>BRA</th><th>BRA+CCA</th><th></th><th>CL</th><th>CF</th></tr><tr><th>Score</th><th>Outcome</th><th>Score</th><th>Outcome</th><th>Delta</th><th>Total</th><th>BRA</th><th>CCA</th><th>Total</th><th>BRA</th><th>CCA</th></tr></tbody><tbody><tr><th>Acheilognathus chankaensis</th><td>N</td><td>10</td><td>Medium</td><td>8</td><td>Medium</td><td>−2</td><td>3.4</td><td>3.4</td><td>3.5</td><td>0.85</td><td>0.85</td><td>0.88</td></tr><tr><th>Acheilognathus macropterus</th><td>N</td><td>−2</td><td>Low</td><td>−4</td><td>Low</td><td>−2</td><td>3.3</td><td>3.3</td><td>3.2</td><td>0.81</td><td>0.82</td><td>0.79</td></tr><tr><th>Acipenser baerii</th><td>Y</td><td>26</td><td>High</td><td>32</td><td>High</td><td>6</td><td>3.0</td><td>3.0</td><td>2.8</td><td>0.74</td><td>0.74</td><td>0.71</td></tr><tr><th>Ameiurus nebulosus</th><td>Y</td><td>29</td><td>High</td><td>35</td><td>High</td><td>6</td><td>3.0</td><td>3.0</td><td>2.8</td><td>0.75</td><td>0.76</td><td>0.71</td></tr><tr><th>Anguilla anguilla</th><td>N</td><td>0</td><td>Low</td><td>−2</td><td>Low</td><td>−2</td><td>3.0</td><td>3.0</td><td>3.0</td><td>0.77</td><td>0.77</td><td>0.75</td></tr><tr><th>Anguilla japonica</th><td>N</td><td>−2</td><td>Low</td><td>−4</td><td>Low</td><td>−2</td><td>3.1</td><td>3.2</td><td>3.0</td><td>0.79</td><td>0.80</td><td>0.75</td></tr><tr><th>Carassius cuvieri</th><td>Y</td><td>24</td><td>High</td><td>28</td><td>High</td><td>4</td><td>3.1</td><td>3.1</td><td>2.8</td><td>0.78</td><td>0.79</td><td>0.71</td></tr><tr><th>Clarias gariepinus</th><td>Y</td><td>39.5</td><td>High</td><td>47.5</td><td>High</td><td>8</td><td>3.1</td><td>3.1</td><td>2.8</td><td>0.77</td><td>0.78</td><td>0.71</td></tr><tr><th>Ctenopharyngodon idella</th><td>Y</td><td>29.5</td><td>High</td><td>33.5</td><td>High</td><td>4</td><td>3.3</td><td>3.3</td><td>3.2</td><td>0.83</td><td>0.84</td><td>0.79</td></tr><tr><th>Cultrichthys erythropterus</th><td>N</td><td>22.5</td><td>High</td><td>24.5</td><td>High</td><td>2</td><td>3.2</td><td>3.3</td><td>3.0</td><td>0.81</td><td>0.82</td><td>0.75</td></tr><tr><th>Gambusia affinis</th><td>Y</td><td>39</td><td>High</td><td>41</td><td>High</td><td>2</td><td>3.1</td><td>3.1</td><td>3.0</td><td>0.78</td><td>0.78</td><td>0.75</td></tr><tr><th>Hypomesus olidus</th><td>N</td><td>16</td><td>Medium</td><td>16</td><td>Medium</td><td>0</td><td>3.2</td><td>3.2</td><td>3.0</td><td>0.79</td><td>0.80</td><td>0.75</td></tr><tr><th>Hypophthalmichthys molitrix</th><td>Y</td><td>24</td><td>High</td><td>30</td><td>High</td><td>6</td><td>3.3</td><td>3.3</td><td>3.0</td><td>0.83</td><td>0.84</td><td>0.75</td></tr><tr><th>Hypophthalmichthys nobilis</th><td>Y</td><td>26</td><td>High</td><td>32</td><td>High</td><td>6</td><td>3.3</td><td>3.4</td><td>3.0</td><td>0.84</td><td>0.85</td><td>0.75</td></tr><tr><th>Hyporhamphus intermedius</th><td>N</td><td>7</td><td>Medium</td><td>7</td><td>Medium</td><td>0</td><td>3.2</td><td>3.2</td><td>3.0</td><td>0.80</td><td>0.80</td><td>0.75</td></tr><tr><th>Hypostomus plecostomus</th><td>Y</td><td>51</td><td>High</td><td>59</td><td>High</td><td>8</td><td>3.0</td><td>3.0</td><td>3.0</td><td>0.75</td><td>0.74</td><td>0.75</td></tr><tr><th>Ictalurus punctatus</th><td>Y</td><td>36.5</td><td>High</td><td>42.5</td><td>High</td><td>6</td><td>3.0</td><td>3.0</td><td>2.7</td><td>0.75</td><td>0.76</td><td>0.67</td></tr><tr><th>Labeo rohita</th><td>N</td><td>10</td><td>Medium</td><td>14</td><td>Medium</td><td>4</td><td>3.1</td><td>3.2</td><td>3.0</td><td>0.79</td><td>0.79</td><td>0.75</td></tr><tr><th>Megalobrama amblycephala</th><td>N</td><td>10</td><td>Medium</td><td>10</td><td>Medium</td><td>0</td><td>3.4</td><td>3.4</td><td>3.3</td><td>0.84</td><td>0.84</td><td>0.83</td></tr><tr><th>Micropterus salmoides</th><td>Y</td><td>35</td><td>High</td><td>43</td><td>High</td><td>8</td><td>3.1</td><td>3.2</td><td>2.5</td><td>0.79</td><td>0.81</td><td>0.63</td></tr><tr><th>Mylopharyngodon piceus</th><td>Y</td><td>29</td><td>High</td><td>35</td><td>High</td><td>6</td><td>3.3</td><td>3.3</td><td>3.0</td><td>0.82</td><td>0.83</td><td>0.75</td></tr><tr><th>Neosalanx taihuensis</th><td>N</td><td>24.5</td><td>High</td><td>22.5</td><td>High</td><td>−2</td><td>3.4</td><td>3.4</td><td>3.0</td><td>0.85</td><td>0.86</td><td>0.75</td></tr><tr><th>Oncorhynchus mykiss</th><td>Y</td><td>29</td><td>High</td><td>37</td><td>High</td><td>8</td><td>3.0</td><td>3.0</td><td>2.8</td><td>0.75</td><td>0.75</td><td>0.71</td></tr><tr><th>Oreochromis aureus</th><td>Y</td><td>49</td><td>High</td><td>61</td><td>High</td><td>12</td><td>3.1</td><td>3.1</td><td>2.7</td><td>0.77</td><td>0.78</td><td>0.67</td></tr><tr><th>Oreochromis mossambicus</th><td>Y</td><td>44.5</td><td>High</td><td>56.5</td><td>High</td><td>12</td><td>2.9</td><td>3.0</td><td>2.8</td><td>0.75</td><td>0.75</td><td>0.71</td></tr><tr><th>Oreochromis niloticus</th><td>Y</td><td>47</td><td>High</td><td>59</td><td>High</td><td>12</td><td>2.9</td><td>3.0</td><td>2.5</td><td>0.74</td><td>0.75</td><td>0.63</td></tr><tr><th>Parabramis pekinensis</th><td>N</td><td>5.5</td><td>Medium</td><td>3.5</td><td>Medium</td><td>−2</td><td>3.3</td><td>3.3</td><td>3.0</td><td>0.81</td><td>0.82</td><td>0.75</td></tr><tr><th>Paramisgurnus dabryanus</th><td>N</td><td>13.5</td><td>Medium</td><td>17.5</td><td>High</td><td>4</td><td>3.2</td><td>3.2</td><td>3.0</td><td>0.80</td><td>0.80</td><td>0.75</td></tr><tr><th>Piaractus brachypomus</th><td>Y</td><td>8</td><td>Medium</td><td>12</td><td>Medium</td><td>4</td><td>3.1</td><td>3.1</td><td>3.0</td><td>0.77</td><td>0.77</td><td>0.75</td></tr><tr><th>Prochilodus lineatus</th><td>N</td><td>11</td><td>Medium</td><td>17</td><td>Medium</td><td>6</td><td>3.1</td><td>3.1</td><td>3.0</td><td>0.76</td><td>0.77</td><td>0.75</td></tr><tr><th>Protosalanx hyalocranius</th><td>N</td><td>14.5</td><td>Medium</td><td>12.5</td><td>Medium</td><td>−2</td><td>3.1</td><td>3.1</td><td>2.8</td><td>0.76</td><td>0.77</td><td>0.71</td></tr><tr><th>Rhinogobius cliffordpopei</th><td>Y</td><td>37</td><td>High</td><td>43</td><td>High</td><td>6</td><td>3.1</td><td>3.1</td><td>2.8</td><td>0.76</td><td>0.77</td><td>0.71</td></tr><tr><th>Salmo trutta</th><td>Y</td><td>18</td><td>High</td><td>12</td><td>Medium</td><td>−6</td><td>2.9</td><td>2.9</td><td>3.0</td><td>0.73</td><td>0.72</td><td>0.75</td></tr><tr><th>Sarcocheilichthys nigripinnis</th><td>N</td><td>3</td><td>Medium</td><td>3</td><td>Medium</td><td>0</td><td>3.5</td><td>3.5</td><td>3.2</td><td>0.86</td><td>0.87</td><td>0.79</td></tr><tr><th>Siniperca chuatsi</th><td>N</td><td>14.5</td><td>Medium</td><td>18.5</td><td>High</td><td>4</td><td>3.0</td><td>3.0</td><td>2.8</td><td>0.74</td><td>0.74</td><td>0.71</td></tr><tr><th>Tinca tinca</th><td>Y</td><td>21</td><td>High</td><td>27</td><td>High</td><td>6</td><td>3.1</td><td>3.1</td><td>3.0</td><td>0.77</td><td>0.77</td><td>0.75</td></tr><tr><th>Toxabramis swinhonis</th><td>N</td><td>16.5</td><td>Medium</td><td>16.5</td><td>Medium</td><td>0</td><td>3.3</td><td>3.4</td><td>3.2</td><td>0.84</td><td>0.84</td><td>0.79</td></tr><tr><th>A priori categorisation (N: non-invasive; Y: invasive); Screening component (BRA: Basic Risk Assessment, BRA+CCA: BRA+ Climate Change Assessment, Delta: BRA+CCA score minus BRA score); Confidence (CL: confidence level, CF: confidence factor); Outcome (Low: score <1, Medium: 1 ≤ score <17.25, High: score ≥ 17.25)</th></tr></tbody></table>

The Response of the Southern Ocean to Climatological Iceberg Freshwater Forcing

Data Availability Statement: The data presented here are the model outputs for the study titled "The Response of the Southern Ocean to Climatological Iceberg Freshwater Forcing." Due to size limitations on data uploads, a coarser resolution dataset is provided. For access to the full-resolution dataset, please contact the corresponding author at <a rel="noopener">jingwei.zhang@utas.edu.au</a>.

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2021View details →

Table 1 in Sodium fluoride induce alterations in glycogen metabolism in freshwater catfish, Clarias batrachus (Linn.)

Table 1: Level of glycogen content (mg/g wet tissues) in muscle, liver and testis tissues of C. batrachus after exposure to NaF.<table><tbody><tr><th>Parameters</th><th>Exposure Time (Days)</th><th>Group I (Control)</th><th>Experimental setup Group II (35 mg F/L)</th><th>Group III (70mg F/L)</th></tr></tbody><tbody><tr><th>Muscle glycogen</th><td>60</td><td>0.87 ± 0.16</td><td>0.72 ± 0.13</td><td>1.72 ±0.14*</td></tr><tr><th>(mg/g wet tissue)</th><td>90</td><td>0.85 ± 0.12</td><td>0.52 ±0.10</td><td>1.85±0.10*</td></tr><tr><th>Liver glycogen</th><td>60</td><td>20.82 ± 1.01</td><td>18.24 ± 0.68</td><td>25.92 ± 0.93*</td></tr><tr><th>(mg/g wet tissue)</th><td>90</td><td>20.95 ±1.02</td><td>18.12 ± 1.20</td><td>28.02 ±1.10*</td></tr><tr><th>Testis glycogen</th><td>60</td><td>9.12 ± 0.85</td><td>6.02 ± 0.83*</td><td>5.60± 0.62*</td></tr><tr><th>(mg/g wet tissue)</th><td>90</td><td>9.25 ± 0.70</td><td>4.85 ± 0.52*</td><td>3.02± 0.54**</td></tr></tbody></table>(Values are mean ± SE, n= 6, Compared with control * P<0.01, ** P<0.001)

A global dataset of freshwater fish trophic interactions

Dataset associated with Ridgway and Wesner. 2024. A global dataset of freshwater fish trophic interactions. Scientific Data.

opencc-by-4.0Nov 2024View details →

Mildenberger - Upper thermal tolerances of three east Texas freshwater mussels

These data and analyses are from a study on 3 species of East Texas freshwater mussels, which determined each species' upper lethal thermal tolerances. The study also included water temperature measurements, expanded with hindcasting code, and a uniform continuous above-threshold (UCAT) analysis on extreme exceedances.

opencc-zeroDec 2016View details →

Data from: Genomic signatures of paleodrainages in a freshwater fish along the southeastern coast of Brazil: genetic structure reflects past riverine properties

Past shifts in connectivity in riverine environments (for example, sea-level changes) and the properties of current drainages can act as drivers of genetic structure and demographic processes in riverine population of fishes. However, it is unclear whether the same river properties that structure variation on recent timescales will also leave similar genomic signatures that reflect paleodrainage properties. By characterizing genetic structure in a freshwater fish species (Hollandichthys multifasciatus) from a system of basins along the Atlantic coast of Brazil we test for the effects of paleodrainages caused by sea-level changes during the Pleistocene. Given that the paleodrainage properties differ along the Brazilian coast, we also evaluate whether estimated genetic diversity within paleodrainages can be explained by past riverine properties (i.e., area and number of rivers in a paleodrainage). Our results demonstrate that genetic structure between populations is not just highly concordant with paleodrainages, but that differences in the genetic diversity among paleodrainages correspond to the joint effect of differences in the area encompassed by, and the number of rivers, within a paleodrainage. Our findings extend the influence of current riverine properties on genetic diversity to those associated with past paleodrainage properties. We discuss how these findings may explain the inconsistent support for paleodrainages in structuring divergence from different global regions and the importance of taking into account past conditions for understanding the high species diversity of freshwater fish that we currently observe in the world, and especially in the Neotropics.

opencc-zeroMay 2020View details →

Origin of the natural variation in the storage of dietary carotenoids in freshwater amphipod crustaceans

Carotenoids are diverse lipophilic natural pigments which are stored in variable amounts by animals. Given the multiple biological functions of carotenoids, such variation may have strong implications in evolutionary biology. Crustaceans such as Gammarus amphipods store large amounts of these pigments and inter-population variation occurs. While differences in parasite selective pressure have been proposed to explain this variation, the contribution of other factors such as genetic differences in the gammarid ability to assimilate and/or store pigments, and the environmental availability of carotenoids cannot be dismissed. This study investigates the relative contributions of the gammarid genotype and of the environmental availability of carotenoids in the natural variability in carotenoid storage. It further explores the link of this natural variability in carotenoid storage with major crustacean immune parameters. We addressed these aspects using the cryptic diversity in the amphipod crustacean Gammarus fossarum and a diet supplementation protocol in the laboratory. Our results suggest that natural variation in G. fossarum storage of dietary carotenoids results from both the availability of the pigments in the environment and the genetically-based ability of the gammarids to assimilate and/or store them, which is associated to levels of stimulation of cellular immune defences. While our results may support the hypothesis that carotenoids storage in this crustacean may evolve in response to parasitic pressure, a better understanding of the specific roles of this large pigment storage in the crustacean physiology is needed.

opencc-by-4.0Jul 2021View details →

Dissolved organic matter degradation in the freshwater portion of the St. Lawrence River (2019)

During the summer of 2019, we sampled a 207 km transect of the St. Lawrence, a large temperate river in which flows two strikingly distinct water masses in terms of origin as well as chemical and physical properties. We then assessed dissolved organic matter bio- and photo-reactivity at 40 sites along the river through a series of standardized incubations and exposure to simulated sunlight, and then used water irradiance and morphometric profiles to estimate in situ areal rates of processing across the river. The main variables presented are DOC concentrations and DOM composition data generated by a PARAFAC model. In addition, this dataset also includes results for a suite of standard physical and chemical variables as well as light attenuation profiles obtained with a profiling radiometer.

opencc-zeroDec 2020View details →

Novel insights into habitat suitability for Amazonian freshwater mussels linked with hydraulic and landscape drivers

Novel insights into habitat suitability for two Unionida freshwater mussels, Castalia ambigua Lamarck, 1819 (Hyriidae) and Anodontites elongatus (Swainson, 1823) (Mycetopodidae), is presented on the basis of hydraulic variables linked with the riverbed in six 500 m reaches in an eastern Amazonian river basin. Within the reaches, there was strong habitat heterogeneity in hydrodynamics and substrate composition. In addition, we investigated stressors based on landscape modification that are associated with declines in mussel density. We measured hydraulic variables for each 500 m reach, and landscape stressors at two spatial scales (subcatchment and riparian buffer forest). We used the Random Forest algorithm, a tree-based model, to predict the hydraulic variables linked with habitat suitability for mussels, and to predict which landscape stressors were most associated with mussel density declines. Both mussel species were linked with low substrate heterogeneity and greater riverbed stability (low Froude and Reynolds numbers), especially at high flow (low stream power). Different sediment grain size preferences were observed between mussel species: Castalia ambigua was associated with medium sand, and Anodontites elongatus with medium and fine sand. Declines in mussel density were associated with modifications linked to urbanization at small scales (riparian buffer forest), especially with percent of and distance from rural settlements, distance to the nearest street, and road density. In summary, the high variance explained in both hydraulic and landscape models indicated high predictive power, suggesting that our findings may be extrapolated and used as a baseline to test hypotheses of habitat suitability in other Amazonian rivers for Castalia ambigua and Anodontites elongatus, and also for other freshwater mussel species. Our results highlight the urgent need for aquatic habitat conservation to maintain sheltered habitats during high flow as well as mitigate the effects of landscape modifications at the riparian buffer scale, both of which are important for maintaining dense mussel populations and habitat quality.

opencc-zeroJul 2021View details →

Extracted data from primary literature examining impacts of recreational activities on freshwater ecosystems

Aquatic ecosystems are attractive sites for recreation. However, human presence at or on aquatic ecosystems can have a range of ecological impacts, creating trade-offs between recreation as ecosystem service and biodiversity conservation. There is currently no synthesis of evidence regarding the ecological impacts associated with various forms of aquatic recreation, to compare the magnitude of effects between types of recreation. Therefore, conservation conflicts surrounding water-based recreation are difficult to manage. We conducted a global meta-analysis, differentiating various recreational impacts and the type of recreational uses in four categories: shore use, shoreline angling, swimming and boating; and studied ecological impacts directed at three levels of biological organization: individuals, populations, and communities. We screened over 13,000 articles and identified 94 suitable studies providing 701 effect sizes for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Aggregated across all animal and plant taxa, impacts of boating and shore use resulted in highly significant effects on almost all levels of biological organization. Regarding taxonomic groups, the most negative effects of water-based recreation were observed in invertebrates, whereas effects on birds were most pronounced at individual levels and not significant at community levels. From a conservation perspective, fostering water-based recreation and the ecological services they provide must be balanced with ecological impacts associated with the activities. Although generalizations are challenging, local scale effects of activity-specific constraints seem unlikely to be effective if other forms of water-based recreation continue.

opencc-zeroJun 2017View details →

FIG. 7 in Checklist of the terrestrial and freshwater arthropods of French Polynesia (Chelicerata; Myriapoda; Crustacea; Hexapoda)

FIG. 7. — Raiateana oulietea Boulard, 1979 from Raiatea. Photograph: F. Jacq.

opencc-zeroJun 2017View details →

FIG. 4 in Checklist of the terrestrial and freshwater arthropods of French Polynesia (Chelicerata; Myriapoda; Crustacea; Hexapoda)

FIG. 4. — Misumenops melloleitaoi Berland,1942 from Tahiti.Photograph:F.Jacq.