Cargando…
Will fencing floodplain and riverine wetlands from feral pig damage conserve fish community values?
Installation of feral pig (Sus scrofa) exclusion fences to conserve and rehabilitate coastal floodplain habitat for fish production and water quality services remains untested. Twenty‐one floodplain and riverine wetlands in the Archer River catchment (north Queensland) were surveyed during postwet (...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8525148/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34707817 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.8054 |
_version_ | 1784585635442458624 |
---|---|
author | Waltham, Nathan J. Schaffer, Jason |
author_facet | Waltham, Nathan J. Schaffer, Jason |
author_sort | Waltham, Nathan J. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Installation of feral pig (Sus scrofa) exclusion fences to conserve and rehabilitate coastal floodplain habitat for fish production and water quality services remains untested. Twenty‐one floodplain and riverine wetlands in the Archer River catchment (north Queensland) were surveyed during postwet (June–August) and late‐dry season (November–December) in 2016, 2017, and 2018, using a fyke net soaked overnight (~14–15 hr) to test: (a) whether the fish assemblage are similar in wetlands with and without fences; and (b) whether specific environmental conditions influence fish composition between fenced and unfenced wetlands. A total of 6,353 fish representing twenty‐six species from 15 families were captured. There were no wetland differences in fish assemblages across seasons, years and for fenced and unfenced (PERMANOVA, Pseudo‐F < 0.589, p < .84). Interestingly, the late‐dry season fish were far smaller compared to postwet season fish: a strategy presumably in place to maximize rapid disposal following rain and floodplain connectivity. In each wetland, a calibrated Hydrolab was deployed (between 2 and4 days, with 20 min logging) in the epilimnion (0.2 m) and revealed distinct diel water quality cycling of temperature, dissolved oxygen and pH (conductivity represented freshwater wetlands), which was more obvious in the late‐dry season survey because of extreme summer conditions. Water quality varied among wetlands in terms of the daily amplitude and extent of daily photosynthesis recovery, which highlights the need to consider local conditions and that applying general assumptions around water quality conditions for these types of wetlands is problematic for managers. Though many fish access wetlands during wet season connection, the seasonal effect of reduced water level conditions seems more overimprovised when compared to whether fences are installed, as all wetlands supported few, juvenile, or no fish species because they had dried completely regardless of the presence of fences. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8525148 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-85251482021-10-26 Will fencing floodplain and riverine wetlands from feral pig damage conserve fish community values? Waltham, Nathan J. Schaffer, Jason Ecol Evol Original Research Installation of feral pig (Sus scrofa) exclusion fences to conserve and rehabilitate coastal floodplain habitat for fish production and water quality services remains untested. Twenty‐one floodplain and riverine wetlands in the Archer River catchment (north Queensland) were surveyed during postwet (June–August) and late‐dry season (November–December) in 2016, 2017, and 2018, using a fyke net soaked overnight (~14–15 hr) to test: (a) whether the fish assemblage are similar in wetlands with and without fences; and (b) whether specific environmental conditions influence fish composition between fenced and unfenced wetlands. A total of 6,353 fish representing twenty‐six species from 15 families were captured. There were no wetland differences in fish assemblages across seasons, years and for fenced and unfenced (PERMANOVA, Pseudo‐F < 0.589, p < .84). Interestingly, the late‐dry season fish were far smaller compared to postwet season fish: a strategy presumably in place to maximize rapid disposal following rain and floodplain connectivity. In each wetland, a calibrated Hydrolab was deployed (between 2 and4 days, with 20 min logging) in the epilimnion (0.2 m) and revealed distinct diel water quality cycling of temperature, dissolved oxygen and pH (conductivity represented freshwater wetlands), which was more obvious in the late‐dry season survey because of extreme summer conditions. Water quality varied among wetlands in terms of the daily amplitude and extent of daily photosynthesis recovery, which highlights the need to consider local conditions and that applying general assumptions around water quality conditions for these types of wetlands is problematic for managers. Though many fish access wetlands during wet season connection, the seasonal effect of reduced water level conditions seems more overimprovised when compared to whether fences are installed, as all wetlands supported few, juvenile, or no fish species because they had dried completely regardless of the presence of fences. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-09-24 /pmc/articles/PMC8525148/ /pubmed/34707817 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.8054 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Waltham, Nathan J. Schaffer, Jason Will fencing floodplain and riverine wetlands from feral pig damage conserve fish community values? |
title | Will fencing floodplain and riverine wetlands from feral pig damage conserve fish community values? |
title_full | Will fencing floodplain and riverine wetlands from feral pig damage conserve fish community values? |
title_fullStr | Will fencing floodplain and riverine wetlands from feral pig damage conserve fish community values? |
title_full_unstemmed | Will fencing floodplain and riverine wetlands from feral pig damage conserve fish community values? |
title_short | Will fencing floodplain and riverine wetlands from feral pig damage conserve fish community values? |
title_sort | will fencing floodplain and riverine wetlands from feral pig damage conserve fish community values? |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8525148/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34707817 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.8054 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT walthamnathanj willfencingfloodplainandriverinewetlandsfromferalpigdamageconservefishcommunityvalues AT schafferjason willfencingfloodplainandriverinewetlandsfromferalpigdamageconservefishcommunityvalues |