Stream benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages reveal the importance of a recently established freshwater protected area in a tropical watershed By Elfritzson M. Peralta*, Alexis E. Belen, Gelsie Rose Buenaventura, Francis Godwin G. Cantre, Katharine Grace R. Espiritu, Jana Nicole A. De Vera, Cristine P. Perez, Aleziz Kryzzien V. Tan, Irisse Bianca B. De Jesus, Paul Palomares, Jonathan Carlo A. Briones, Tohru Ikeya, Francis S. Magbanua, Rey Donne S. Papa, and Noboru Okuda Abstract Unsustainable urbanization in the Indo-Pacific continues to threaten terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems due to habitat disturbances driven by human pressures. The Marikina Watershed, one of the most critical watersheds in the Philippines, has been exposed to economic and population growth resulting in landscape modification and water quality degradation. This led to establishment of the Upper Marikina River Basin Protected Landscape (UMRBPL) to rehabilitate the watershed ecosystem. To strengthen this conservation initiative, we aimed to assess whether the establishment of UMRBPL has been effective in conservation of benthic macroinvertebrate diversity in streams of the Marikina Watershed. Sixteen streams, eight from UMRBPL and eight from adjoining unprotected areas, were monitored for benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages and their habitat environments, such as pH, water temperature, dissolved oxygen, total dissolved solids, conductivity, salinity, and canopy openness. Principal component analysis and non-metric multidimensional scaling based on the environmental variables and biological metrics, respectively, revealed that habitat quality and benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages significantly differed between the protected and unprotected streams, with the former having better environment and higher biodiversity. More precisely, protected streams have significantly higher dissolved oxygen and lower canopy openness and material loadings as compared to unprotected streams. Consequently, taxon richness was four- fold higher in protected streams while stream quality indices based on abundance of key invertebrate groups (EPT and EPTC) were ten-fold higher in protected streams, as compared to unprotected streams. This study demonstrates that freshwater protected areas play crucial roles in the conservation of stream ecosystems and biodiversity under rapid urbanization in developing countries, like the Philippines. * Corresponding Author E-mail: [email protected]Pacific Science, vol. 73, no. 3 May 17, 2019 (Early view)
40
Embed
Stream benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages reveal the ......Stream benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages reveal the importance of a recently established freshwater protected area
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Stream benthic macroinvertebrate assemblagesreveal the importance of a recently established
freshwater protected area in a tropical watershed
By Elfritzson M. Peralta*, Alexis E. Belen, Gelsie Rose Buenaventura, FrancisGodwin G. Cantre, Katharine Grace R. Espiritu, Jana Nicole A. De Vera, Cristine
P. Perez, Aleziz Kryzzien V. Tan, Irisse Bianca B. De Jesus, Paul Palomares,Jonathan Carlo A. Briones, Tohru Ikeya, Francis S. Magbanua, Rey Donne S.
Papa, and Noboru Okuda
AbstractUnsustainable urbanization in the Indo-Pacific continues to threaten terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems due to habitat disturbances driven by human pressures. The Marikina Watershed, oneof the most critical watersheds in the Philippines, has been exposed to economic and population growth resulting in landscape modification and water quality degradation. This led to establishment of the Upper Marikina River Basin Protected Landscape (UMRBPL) to rehabilitate the watershed ecosystem. To strengthen this conservation initiative, we aimed to assess whether the establishment of UMRBPL has been effective in conservation of benthic macroinvertebrate diversity in streams of the Marikina Watershed. Sixteen streams, eight from UMRBPL and eight from adjoining unprotected areas, were monitored for benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages and their habitat environments, such as pH, water temperature, dissolved oxygen, total dissolved solids, conductivity, salinity, and canopy openness. Principal component analysis and non-metric multidimensional scaling based on the environmental variables and biological metrics, respectively, revealed that habitat quality and benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages significantly differed between the protected and unprotected streams, with the former having better environment and higher biodiversity. More precisely, protected streams have significantly higher dissolved oxygen and lower canopy openness and material loadings as compared to unprotected streams. Consequently, taxon richness was four-fold higher in protected streams while stream quality indices based on abundance of key invertebrate groups (EPT and EPTC) were ten-fold higher in protected streams, as compared to unprotected streams. This study demonstrates that freshwater protected areas play crucial roles inthe conservation of stream ecosystems and biodiversity under rapid urbanization in developing countries, like the Philippines.*Corresponding Author E-mail: [email protected]
Corporal-Lodangco, I. L., and L. M. Leslie. 2017. Defining Philippine Climate Zones Using
Surface and High-Resolution Satellite Data. Procedia. Comput. Sci. 114:324–332.
Couceiro, S. R., Hamada, N., Luz, S. L., Forsberg, B. R., and T. P. Pimentel. 2007. Deforestation
and sewage effects on aquatic macroinvertebrates in urban streams in Manaus, Amazonas,
Brazil. Hydrobiologia. 575:271–284.
Cowx, I. G. 2002. Analysis of threats to freshwater fish conservation: past and present
challenges. Pages 201–220 in M. J. Collares-Pereira, I. G. Cowx, and M. M. Coelho, eds.
Conservation of freshwater fishes: options for the future. Blackwell Scientific Press, United
Kingdom.
Crivelli, A. J. 2002. The role of protected areas in freshwater fish conservation. Pages 373–388
in M. J. Collares-Pereira, I. G. Cowx, and M. M. Coelho, eds. Conservation of freshwater fishes:
options for the future. Blackwell Scientific Press, United Kingdom.
Daniel, M. H., Montebelo, A. A., Bernardes, M. C., Ometto, J. P., De Camargo, P. B., Krusche,
A. V., ... and L. A. Martinelli. 2002. Effects of urban sewage on dissolved oxygen, dissolved
inorganic and organic carbon, and electrical conductivity of small streams along a gradient of
urbanization in the Piracicaba river basin. Water Air. Soil. Poll. 136:189–206.
De Carvalho Aguiar, V. M., Neto, J. A. B., and C. M. Rangel. 2011. Eutrophication and hypoxia
in four streams discharging in Guanabara Bay, RJ, Brazil, a case study. Mar. Pollut. Bull.
62:1915–1919.
DeMoor, F. C., and V. D. Ivanov. 2007. Global diversity of caddisflies (Trichoptera: Insecta) in
freshwater. Hydrobiologia. 595:393–407.
Díaz, S., Fargione, J., Chapin III, F. S., and D. Tilman. 2006. Biodiversity loss threatens human
well-being. Plos. Biol. 4:e277.
[DENR] Department of Environment and Natural Resources. 2012. Proclamation of Marikina
watershed as protected area to boost green agenda of government. Proclamation No. 296,
http://bmb.gov.ph/downloads/PPROC/Proclamation%20296.pdf Accessed 14 June 2018
[DENR] Department of Environment and Natural Resources. 2015. Formulation of an Integrated
River Basin Management and Development Master Plan for Marikina River Basin. 1-7,
http://faspselib.denr.gov.ph/node/248 Accessed 14 June 2018
Doi, H., Takemon, Y., Ohta, T., Ishida, Y., and E. Kikuchi. 2007. Effects of reach-scale canopy
cover on trophic pathways of caddisfly larvae in a Japanese mountain stream. Mar. Freshwater.
Res. 58:811–817.
Dudgeon, D., eds. 1999. Tropical Asian streams: zoobenthos, ecology and conservation. Hong
Kong University Press, Hong Kong.
Epler, J. H. 1996. Identification manual for the water beetles of Florida. State of Florida
Department of Environmental Protection, Tallahassee.
Fabricius, C., Burger, M., and P. A. R. Hockey. 2003. Comparing biodiversity between protected
areas and adjacent rangeland in xeric succulent thicket, South Africa: arthropods and reptiles. J.
Appl. Ecol. 40:392–403.
Fochetti, R. and J. M. T. de Figueroa. 2008. Global diversity of stoneflies (Plecoptera: Insecta) in
freshwater. Hydrobiologia.595:365–377.
Gleick, P., and M. Palaniappan. 2010. Peak water limits to freshwater withdrawal and use.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 107:11155–11162.
Gonzalo, C., and J. A. Camargo. 2013. The impact of an industrial effluent on the water quality,
submerged macrophytes and benthic macroinvertebrates in a dammed river of Central Spain.
Chemosphere. 93: 1117–1124.
Gray, C. L., Hill, S. L., Newbold, T., Hudson, L. N., Börger, L., Contu, S., ... and J. P.
Scharlemann. 2016. Local biodiversity is higher inside than outside terrestrial protected areas
worldwide. Nat. Commun. 12306:1–7.
Gulis, V., and K. Suberkropp. 2003. Leaf litter decomposition and microbial activity in nutrient‐enriched and unaltered reaches of a headwater stream. Freshwater. Biol. 48:123–134.
Hassall, C., and S. Anderson. 2015. Stormwater ponds can contain comparable biodiversity to
unmanaged wetlands in urban areas. Springer International Publishing Switzerland. 745:137–
149.
Hilario, J. E., Se, E. O., Garcia, J. E. S., Almonte, J. J. D., and R. M. D. Almonte. 2017.
Biogeochemical analysis in relation to water quality of Wawa Dam, Rizal,
Philippines. MATTER: Int. J. Sci. Tech. 3:415–432.
Hoang, T. H., Lock, K., Dang, K. C., De Pauw, N., and P. L. M. Goethals. 2010. Spatial and
temporal patterns of macroinvertebrate communities in the du River basin in northern
Vietnam. J. Freshwater Ecol. 25:637–647.
Hopkins, A., McKellar, R., Worboys, G. L., and R. Good, eds. 2015. Climate change and
protected areas. Protected Area Governance and Management. ANU Press, Canberra.
Iwata T., Nakano S., and M. Inoue. 2003. Impacts of past riparian deforestation on stream
communities in a tropical rain forest in Borneo. Ecol. Appl. 13:461–473.
[JICA] Japan International Cooperation Agency. 1994. A study of the Marikina Watershed
development project in the Philippines: Final Report. Japan International Cooperation Agency:
Japan Overseas Forestry Consultants Association,
http://open_jicareport.jica.go.jp/883/883/883_118_11143351.html Accessed 15 June 2018
Jun, Y. C., Kim, N. Y., Kwon, S. J., Han, S. C., Hwang, I. C., Park, J. H., ... and S. J. Hwang.
2011. Effects of land use on benthic macroinvertebrate communities: Comparison of two
mountain streams in Korea. Ann. Limnol-Int. J. Lim. 47:35–49.
Karlen, D. J., Price, R. E., Pichler, T., and J. R. Garey. 2010. Changes in benthic macrofauna
associated with a shallow-water hydrothermal vent gradient in Papua New Guinea. Pac. Sci.
64:391–404.
Kasangaki, A., Chapman, L. J., and J. Balirwa. 2008. Land use and the ecology of benthic
macroinvertebrate assemblages of high-altitude rainforest streams in Uganda. Freshwater. Biol.
53:681–697.
Keith, P. 2000. The part played by protected areas in the conservation of threatened French
freshwater fish. Biol. Conserv. 92:265–273
Kenney M. A., Sutton-Grier A. E., Smith R. F., and S. E. Gresens. 2009. Benthic
macroinvertebrates as indicators of water quality: The intersection of science and policy. Terr.
Arthropod. Rev. 2:99–128.
Khanal, S. N., and O. Moog. 2003. Effects of Stream Poisoning Disturbance on the Benthic
Invertebrate Fauna in a Mid Hill Stream in Nepal. Nepal. J. Sci. Tech. 5:63–74.
Kingsford, R. T., and J. Nevill. 2005. Scientists urge expansion of freshwater protected areas.
Ecol. Manag. Restor. 6:161–162.
Kingsford, R. T., Biggs, H. C., and S. R. Pollard. 2011. Strategic adaptive management in
freshwater protected areas and their rivers. Biol. Conserv. 144:1194–1203.
Lakew, A., and O. Moog. 2015. A multimetric index based on benthic macroinvertebrates for
assessing the ecological status of streams and rivers in central and southeast highlands of
Ethiopia. Hydrobiologia. 751:229–242.
Laurance, W. F., Useche, D. C., Rendeiro, J., Kalka, M., Bradshaw, C. J., Sloan, S. P., ... and V.
Arroyo-Rodriguez. 2012. Averting biodiversity collapse in tropical forest protected areas.
Nature. 489:290–294.
Lyle A.A. and P. S. Maitland. 1992. Conservation of freshwater fish in the British Isles: the
status of fish in National Nature Reserves. Aquat. Conserv. 2:19–34.
Madden, C. P. 2009. Key to genera of larvae of Australia Chironomidae (Diptera). TRIN
Taxonomic Guide.
Mallin, M. A., Johnson, V. L., Ensign, S. H., and T. A. MacPherson. 2006. Factors contributing
to hypoxia in rivers, lakes, and streams. Limnol. Oceanogr, 51:690–701.
Malmqvist, B., and S. Rundle. 2002. Threats to the running water ecosystems of the world.
Environ. Conserv. 29:134–153.
Mancini, L., Formichetti, P., Anselmo, A., Tancioni, L., Marchini, S., and A. Sorace. 2005.
Biological quality of running waters in protected areas: the influence of size and land use.
Biodivers. Conserv. 14:351–364.
Maunder, M., Leiva, A., Santiago-Valentin, E., Stevenson, D. W., Acevedo-Rodríguez, P.,
Meerow, A. W., ... and J. Francisco-Ortega. 2008. Plant conservation in the Caribbean Island
biodiversity hotspot. Bot. Rev. 74:197–207.
McDonald, R. I., Kareiva, P., and R. T. Forman. 2008. The implications of current and future
urbanization for global protected areas and biodiversity conservation. Biodivers.
Conserv. 141:1695–1703.
McLellan, R., Iyengar, L., Jeffries, B., and N. Oerlemans, 2014. Living planet report 2014:
species and spaces, people and places. World Wide Fund for Nature.
Merritt, R. W., Cummins, K. W. and T. M. Burton, eds. 1984. The role of aquatic insects in the
processing and cycling of nutrients. In Resh, V. H. and D. M. Rosenberg. The Ecology of
Aquatic Insects. Praeger Publishers, New York.
Merritt, R. W., Cummins, K. W., and M. B. Berg, eds. 2008. An introduction to the aquatic
invertebrates of North America. Kendall Hunt, Dubuque.
Miles, E. J. 2008. The SSC cycle: a PDCA approach to address site-specific characteristics in a
continuous shallow water quality monitoring project. J. Environ. Monito. 10:604–611.
Morse, J. C., B. P. Stark, McCafferty, W. P. and K. J. Tennessen. 1997. Southern Appalachian
and other southeastern streams at risk: implications for mayflies, dragonflies, stoneflies, and
caddisflies. Pages 17–42 in G. W. Benz and D. E. Collins, eds. Aquatic Fauna in Peril: The
Southeastern Perspective. Southeastern Aquatic Research Institute, Lenz Design and
Communications, Decatur, Georgia.
Nakano, S., Miyasaka, H., and N. Kuhara. 1999. Terrestrial–aquatic linkages: riparian arthropod
inputs alter trophic cascades in a stream food web. Ecology. 80:2435–2441.
Nel, J. L., Roux, D. J., Maree, G., Kleynhans, C. J., Moolman, J., Reyers, B., ... and R. M.
Cowling. 2007. Rivers in peril inside and outside protected areas: a systematic approach to
conservation assessment of river ecosystems. Divers. Distrib. 13:341–352.
Nelson, K. C., Palmer, M. A., Pizzuto, J. E., Moglen, G. E., Angermeier, P. L., Hilderbrand, R.
H., ... and K. Hayhoe. 2009. Forecasting the combined effects of urbanization and climate
change on stream ecosystems: from impacts to management options. J. Appl. Ecol. 46:154–163.
Ocon, C. S., and A. R. Capítulo. 2004. Presence and abundance of Ephemeroptera and other
sensitive macroinvertebrates in relation with habitat conditions in pampean streams (Buenos
Aires, Argentina). Arch. Hydrobiol. 159:473–487.
Ometo, J. P. H., Martinelli, L. A., Ballester, M. V., Gessner, A., Krusche, A. V., Victoria, R. L.,
and M. Williams. 2000. Effects of land use on water chemistry and macroinvertebrates in two
streams of the Piracicaba river basin, southeast Brazil. Freshwater. Biol. 44:327–337.
Parks, S. A. and A. H. Harcourt. 2002. Reserve size, local human density, and mammalian
extinctions in US protected areas. Conserv. Biol. 16:800–808.
Pescador, M. L., Rasmussen, A. K., and S. C. Harris, eds. 1995. Identification manual for the
caddisfly (Trichoptera) larvae of Florida. Department of Environmental Protection, Division of
Water Facilities, Tallahassee.
Pittock, J., Hansen, L. J., and R. Abell. 2008. Running dry: freshwater biodiversity, protected
areas and climate change. Biodiversity. 9:30–38.
Pond, G. J. 2012. Biodiversity loss in Appalachian headwater streams (Kentucky, USA):
Plecoptera and Trichoptera communities. Hydrobiologia. 679:97–117.
Ramdial, B. S. 1980. Forestry in Trinidad and Tobago. Forestry Division, Ministry of
Agriculture, Land and Fisheries, Trinidad and Tobago.
Ramírez, A., Engman, A., Rosas, K. G., Perez-Reyes, O., and D. M. Martinó-Cardona. 2012.
Urban impacts on tropical island streams: some key aspects influencing ecosystem
response. Urban. Ecosyst. 15:315–325.
Rodrigues, A. S., Akcakaya, H. R., Andelman, S. J., Bakarr, M. I., Boitani, L., Brooks, T. M., ...
and M. Hoffmann. 2004a. Global gap analysis: priority regions for expanding the global
Saunders, D. L., Meeuwig, J. J., and A. C. J. Vincent. 2002. Freshwater protected areas:
strategies for conservation. Conserv. Biol. 16:30–41.
Soares-Filho, B., Moutinho, P., Nepstad, D., Anderson, A., Rodrigues, H., Garcia, R., ... and R.
Silvestrini. 2010. Role of Brazilian Amazon protected areas in climate change mitigation. P.
Natl. Acad. Sci. 107:10821–10826.
Suski, C. D., and S. J. Cooke, S. J. 2006. Conservation of aquatic resources through the use of
freshwater protected areas: opportunities and challenges. Biodivers. Conserv. 16:2015–2029.
Tchakonté, S., Ajeagah, G. A., Camara, A. I., Diomandé, D., Tchatcho, N. L. N., and P.
Ngassam. 2015. Impact of urbanization on aquatic insect assemblages in the coastal zone of
Cameroon: the use of biotraits and indicator taxa to assess environmental
pollution. Hydrobiologia. 755:123–144.
Tobes, I., Gaspar, S., Peláez-Rodríguez, M., and R. Miranda. 2016. Spatial distribution patterns
of fish assemblages relative to macroinvertebrates and environmental conditions in Andean
piedmont streams of the Colombian Amazon. Inland. Waters. 6:89–104.
Tonkin, J. D. 2014. Drivers of macroinvertebrate community structure in unmodified streams.
Peerj. 2:465
Uherek, C. B., and F. B. Pinto Gouveia. 2014. Biological monitoring using macroinvertebrates as
bioindicators of water quality of Maroaga Stream in the Maroaga Cave System, Presidente
Figueiredo, Amazon, Brazil. Int. J. Ecol. 2014:1–7.
Utz, R. M., Hopkins, K. G., Beesley, L., Booth, D. B., Hawley, R. J., Baker, M. E., ... and K.
Jones. 2016. Ecological resistance in urban streams: the role of natural and legacy attributes.
Freshw. Sci. 35:380–397.
Vannote, R. L., Minshall, G. W., Cummins, K. W., Sedell, J. R., and C. E. Cushing. 1980. The
river continuum concept. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 37:130–137.
Venter, O., Fuller, R. A., Segan, D. B., Carwardine, J., Brooks, T., Butchart, S. H., ... and H. P.
Possingham. 2014. Targeting global protected area expansion for imperiled biodiversity. Plos.
Biol. 12:e1001891.
Wakelin, S. A., Colloff, M. J., and R. S. Kookana. 2008. Effect of wastewater treatment plant
effluent on microbial function and community structure in the sediment of a freshwater stream
with variable seasonal flow. Appl. Environ. Microb. 74:2659–2668.
Walsh, C. J., Gooderham, J. P., Grace, M. R., Sdraulig, S., Rosyidi, M. I., and A. Lelono. 2002.
The relative influence of diffuse-and point-source disturbances on a small upland stream in East
Java, Indonesia: a preliminary investigation. Hydrobiologia. 487:183–192.
Walsh, C. J., Roy, A. H., Feminella, J. W., Cottingham, P. D., Groffman, P. M., and R. P.
Morgan. 2005. The urban stream syndrome: current knowledge and the search for a cure. J. N.
Am. Benthol. Soc. 24:706 –723.
Wang, B., Liu, D., Liu, S., Zhang, Y., Lu, D., and L. Wang. 2012. Impacts of urbanization on
stream habitats and macroinvertebrate communities in the tributaries of Qiangtang River,
China. Hydrobiologia. 680:39–51.
Watson, J. E., Dudley, N., Segan, D. B., and M. Hockings. 2014. The performance and potential
of protected areas. Nature. 515:67–73.
Whittaker, R. H. 1960. Vegetation of the Siskiyou Mountains, Oregon and California. Ecol.
Monogr. 30:279–338.
Wiersma, Y. F., and D. L. Urban. 2005. Beta diversity and nature reserve system design in the
Yukon, Canada. Conser. Biol. 19:1262–1272.
Wilkins, P. M., Cao, Y., Heske, E. J., and J. M. Levengood. 2015. Influence of a forest preserve
on aquatic macroinvertebrates, habitat quality, and water quality in an urban stream. Urban.
Ecosyst. 18:989–1006.
Williams J. E. 1991. Preserves and refuges for native western fishes: history and management.
Pages 171–189 in W. L. Minckley and J. E. Deacon, eds. Battle against extinction native fish
management in the American west. The University of Arizona Press, United States of America.
Yule, C., and H. Yong, eds. 2004. Freshwater Invertebrates of the Malaysian Region. Malaysia:
AkademiSains, Malaysia.
Zhang, Y., Dudgeon, D., Cheng, D., Thoe, W., Fok, L., Wang, Z., and J. H. Lee. 2010. Impacts
of land use and water quality on macroinvertebrate communities in the Pearl River drainage
basin, China. Hydrobiologia. 652:71–88.
ParameterProtected streams Unprotected streams t df P-value
P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8GrandMean
U1 U2 U3 U4 U5 U6 U7 U8GrandMean
CanopyOpenness (%)
44.0(9.1)
30.6(4.1)
34.9(2.0)
45.0(0.3)
23.2(2.2)
43.4(1.0)
26.7(4.1)
14.5(5.3)
32.8(3.9)
48.6(1.5)
24.5(4.5)
42.4(5.3)
52.1(2.5)
70.6(0.8)
78.7–
81.2(0.4)
64.7(4.5)
57.8(6.9)
-3.17 14 <0.01
DO(mg L-1)
7.4–
8.9(0.1)
8.1(0.2)
8.3–
7.8(0.2)
7.7(0.2)
7.5(0.1)
6.9(0.1)
7.8(0.2)
5.2–
7.1(0.6)
4.4(1.2)
5.7(0.1)
8.1(0.1)
5.4(0.4)
5.8 (0.1)3.2(0.6)
5.6(0.5)
3.89 14 <0.01
pH7.9(0.4)
8.0(0.2)
7.1–
7.3(0.2)
7.0(0.1)
7.8(0.1)
5.6(0.3)
4.9(0.1)
6.4(0.7)
7.8(0.1)
7.54–
7.5–
7.2(0.2)
8.0(0.1)
6.6(0.2)
7.9 (0.1)7.1–
7.5(0.2)
-1.39 14 0.19
Conductivity(µS cm-1)
274.0(0.6)
349.0–
256.3(0.7)
235.3(11.2)
266.0(2.1)
176.2(3.6)
91.6(1.5)
167.1(1.6)
227.0(28.0)
352.3(5.2)
455.00–
432.3(0.3)
217.3(2.4)
381.7(2.0)
324.3(3.2)
485.7(10.1)
294.0(7.5)
367.8(31.6)
-3.33 14 <0.01
TDS(mg L-1)
189.3(0.7)
242.0–
177.7(1.3)
165.0(10.0)
184.3(0.9)
121.5(3.5)
62.8(0.6)
116.2(1.3)
157.4(19.5)
218.0(15.7)
315.7(0.7)
301.7(0.7)
152.0(2.5)
263.7(1.2)
224.0(2.5)
336.3(8.7)
202.0(5.0)
251.7(22.4)
-3.17 14 <0.01
Temperature(oC)
24.2(0.3)
26.6(0.2)
24.5(0.1)
23.6(0.2)
24.0–
29.4(0.4)
24.0(0.1)
25.8(0.1)
25.3(0.7)
27.3(0.2)
27.6(0.3)
28.5–
26.6(0.2)
25.7(0.2)
27.2(0.1)
24.4(0.2)
28.7(0.1)
27.0(0.5)
-2.04 14 0.06
Salinity(mg L-1)
124.3(3.2)
163.3(1.5)
119.0(0.6)
115.3(0.3)
122.0–
92.4(5.7)
41.6(1.0)
80.2(1.7)
107.3(12.8)
152.3(5.2)
210.3(0.3)
199.0(0.6)
87.9(8.6)
174.0(1.2)
144.3(1.9)
220.3(7.4)
134.0(3.5)
165.3(15.7)
-2.86 14 0.01
Flow velocity(cm sec-1)
60.4(5.0)
81.8(9.3)
64.8(14.1)
71.7(1.3)
39.8(4.7)
90.4(27.2)
43.9(25.6)
45.5(18.6)
62.3(6.5)
45.0(9.9)
19.4(3.3)
45.5(12.6)
105.0(33.6)
55.7(8.9)
32.1(13.7)
33.6(7.6)
76.9(11.4)
51.7(9.8)
0.91 14 0.38
Table 1 Mean (± standard error) values of environmental variables for protected and unprotected streams in the Marikina Watershed– No standard errors
Table 2 Result of principal component analysis with loading factors of environmental variables Environmental variable PC1 PC2 PC3% variation explained 40.00 22.43 19.87
Canopy Openness (%) 0.66 0.37 -0.03
DO (mg L-1) -0.10 -0.91 0.19
pH 0.93 -0.02 0.24
Conductivity (µS cm-1) 0.80 0.15 -0.49
Temperature (oC) 0.16 0.80 0.23
Flow velocity (cm sec-1) 0.02 0.04 0.98
Bold values were considered high (>|0.60|)
Table 3 Mean (± standard error) values of macroinvertebrate diversity indices for protected and unprotected streams of the Marikina Watershed
Response variable
Protected streams Unprotected streams t df P-value
P1 P2 P3 P4 55 P6 P7 P8GrandMean
U1 U2 U3 U4 U5 U6 U7 U8GrandMean
Diversity index (H’)
1.93(0.23)
1.87(0.08)
2.37(0.01)
2.42(0.03)
2.14(0.08)
1.86(0.05)
1.85(0.07)
1.65(0.28)
2.01(0.10)
1.63(0.12)
– 0.72(0.51)
– 1.29(0.18)
0.54(0.54)
– 0.74(0.05)
0.62(0.22)
5.86 14 <0.01
Evenness0.76
(0.54)0.75
(0.53)0.72
(0.51)0.80
(0.56)0.68
(0.48)0.80
(0.56)0.72
(0.51)0.70
(0.50)0.74
(0.01)0.81
(0.57)–
0.48(0.34)
–0.61
(0.43)– –
0.81(0.45)
0.32(0.12
3.42 14 <0.01
Taxon richness
13.00(2.00)
12.00(1.00)
27.00–
21.00(1.00)
23.50(1.50)
10.50(1.50)
13.00(1.00)
10.50(2.50)
16.31(2.30)
7.50(0.50)
1.00–
4.00(1.00)
1.00–
8.50(0.50)
2.50(1.50)
0.50(0.50)
9.50(7.50)
4.31(1.30)
4.54 14 <0.01
Taxon density
919.98(618.70)
817.76(322.80
)
2254.22(59.18)
2205.8(613.32
)
2668.48(365.84)
1484.88(96.84)
1780.78(672.50
)
634.84(96.84)
1595.84(266.87
)
376.60(150.64
)
43.04(32.28)
322.8(161.40
)
53.8(10.76)
624.08(96.84)
59.18(48.42)
16.14(16.14)
2560.88(2442.52)
507.07(303.11)
2.70 14 0.02
EPT richness
7.50(0.50)
6.00(2.00)
12.00 23.50(0.50)
14.50(0.50)
7.50(0.50)
5.50(0.50)
4.00(2.00)
10.06(2.28)
3.00–
–1.00 0.50
(0.50)2.50
(0.50)1.00 0.50
(0.50)2.50
(0.50)1.38
(0.40)3.75 14 <0.01
EPT density
511.1(295.90)
360.46(188.30
)
1441.84(129.12)
1495.64(139.88
)
1705.46(349.70)
817.76(64.56)
645.6(129.12
)
381.98(69.94)
919.98(192.55
)
220.58(123.74
)–
252.86(209.82
)
21.52(21.52)
59.18(16.14)
16.14(5.38)
16.14(16.14)
118.36–
88.10(35.10)
4.25 14 <0.01
EPTC richness
10.00(2.00)
8.50(3.50)
17.50(0.50)
18.00(1.00)
19.50(0.50)
8.50(0.50)
10.50(0.50)
8.00(3.00)
12.56(1.73)
3.00–
–1.00 0.50
(0.50)3.50
(0.50)2.00
(1.00)0.50
(0.50)3.00
(1.00)1.69
(0.48)6.07 14 <0.01
EPTC density
543.38(317.42)
451.92(247.48
)
1592.48(182.92)
1861.48(430.40
)
2248.84(161.40)
871.56(32.28)
1511.78(500.34
)
484.2(75.32)
1195.71(246.39
)
220.58(123.74
)–
252.86(209.82
)
21.52(21.52)
86.08(10.76)
26.90(16.14)
16.14(16.14)
123.74(5.38)
93.48(34.55)
4.43 14 <0.01
– No computed values and/or standard error
Fig. 1 Map of study sites (protected: 8, unprotected: 8) in the Marikina Watershed with land cover patterns.
Fig. 2 PCA bi-plot based on the major two PC scores across 16 streams in the Marikina Watershed.
Fig. 3 Two-dimensional NMDS ordination based on abundance of benthic macroinvertebrate taxa using Bray-Curtis dissimilarity index.
Supplementary Table S1. Status of the study stream reaches in Marikina Watershed.