DOCSLIB.ORG

Natural Protected Areas of the Wetland and Bird Paradise in the Kizilirmak Delta in Samsun 2019-2023 Management Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Natural Protected Areas of the Wetland and Bird Paradise in the Kizilirmak Delta in Samsun 2019-2023 Management Plan REPUBLIC OF TURKEY MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND URBANIZATION GENERAL DIRECTORATE FOR PROTECTION OF NATURAL ASSETS NATURAL PROTECTED AREAS OF THE WETLAND AND BIRD PARADISE IN THE KIZILIRMAK DELTA IN SAMSUN 2019-2023 MANAGEMENT PLAN ANKARA INDEX INDEX ................................................................................................................................................... i INDEX OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................... iii INDEX OF FIGURES .........................................................................................................................iv INDEX OF PHOTOGRAPHS .............................................................................................................. v 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 2 1.1. GROUNDS OF THE PROJECT .............................................................................................. 2 1.2. PROJECT SITE ...................................................................................................................... 3 1.3. PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT .............................................................................................. 4 1.4. SCOPE OF THE PROJECT ................................................................................................... 4 2. DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................................ 7 2.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA ............................................................................................... 7 2.1.1. LOCATION, DEFINITION, AND BORDERS OF THE AREA ...................................... 7 2.1.2. OWNERSHIP STATUS ................................................................................................ 9 2.1.3. MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE ..................................................................................11 2.2 NATURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA .........................................................................14 2.2.1. PHYSICAL DATA ......................................................................................................14 2.2.1.1. GEOLOGICAL AND TOPOGRAPHICAL CHARACTERISTICS .................14 2.2.1.2 SOIL TYPES ..................................................................................................15 2.2.1.3. METEOROLOGICAL AND CLIMATIC CHARACTERISTICS .....................15 2.2.1.4. HYDROLOGICAL AND HYDROGEOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS ......18 2.2.2. BIOLOGICAL-ECOLOGICAL DATA .........................................................................21 2.2.2.1. FLORA ..........................................................................................................21 2.2.2.2. FAUNA ..........................................................................................................24 2.2.2.3. ECOLOGICAL DATA ...................................................................................31 2.2.3. WATER QUALITY ......................................................................................................37 2.3 SOCIO-ECONOMIC DEMOGRAPHIC STRUCTURE ...........................................................38 2.4 NATURAL AND CULTURAL DATA .....................................................................................40 2.4.1 TRADITIONAL MEANS OF USE ................................................................................40 2.4.2. CULTURAL HERITAGE AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVALUATIONS .....................41 2.4.3. MARINE SITES ..........................................................................................................42 2.4.4. LANDSCAPE VALUES ..............................................................................................44 2.4.5. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL PROTECTED AREAS .................................45 2.5 USAGE OF NATURAL SOURCES .......................................................................................46 2.5.1. PURPOSE OF USING AND QUANTITY OF WATER ...............................................46 2.5.2. FISHERY ....................................................................................................................48 2.5.3. AGRICULTURE AND STOCKBREEDING ................................................................49 2.5.4. TOURISM ...................................................................................................................51 2.5.5. HUNTING ...................................................................................................................52 2.5.6. GRAZING ...................................................................................................................55 2.5.7. OTHER USES OF LANDS .........................................................................................56 3. STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS AND MEETINGS ...........................................................................57 3.1. STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS ................................................................................................57 4. EVALUATION OF THE DATA ......................................................................................................66 4.1 ECOLOGICAL EVALUATION ...............................................................................................66 4.1.1 EVALUATIONS ABOUT THE FLORA AND FAUNA .................................................66 4.1.2 EVALUATIONS ABOUT THE QUALITATIVE............................................................70 4.2. SOCIO-ECONOMIC EVALUATION .....................................................................................71 4.3 LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE EVALUATION ..................................................................72 i 4.4 CULTURAL EVALUATION ...................................................................................................74 5. ZONING AND LAND USE DECISIONS .......................................................................................75 5.1. PROTECTED AREAS AND PLAN DECISIONS ..................................................................75 FIRST 5-YEAR IMPLEMENTATION PERIOD .................................................................................83 A. SUB-PLANS AND PLAN DECISIONS ........................................................................................82 A.1. WATER MANAGEMENT .....................................................................................................82 A.2 VISITOR MANAGEMENT .....................................................................................................83 A.3. GRAZING MANAGEMENT ..................................................................................................86 A.4. AQUACULTURE MANAGEMENT .......................................................................................86 B. MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES AND ACTIVITIES ......................................................................88 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................142 ii INDEX OF TABLES Table 2.1 The essential institutions and organizations responsible for the management of the Kızılırmak Delta and related with the area ..............................................................................13 Table 2.2 Richness of zooplankton species in the lakes in the Kızılırmak Delta ......................24 Table 2.3 EUNIS Habitat Types in the Natural Protected Areas of The Kızılırmak Delta..........32 Table 2.4 Fish breeding facilities with their capacities set in the Derbent Dam Reservoir located in the upper basin of the Kızılırmak Delta and that feeds the delta with discharged water in the delta .............................................................................................................................48 Table 2.5 Limited Aquaculture Fishery Cooperatives that are engaged in trade purpose fishing in the ponds in the Kızılırmak Delta and in the Derbent Dam Reservoir, number of members, location of operations. Yörükler are registered in the Ondokuzmayıs district, and others are registered in the Bafra district .....................................................................................48 Table 2.6 Fishery production data across Samsun province for the year 2016 (ton) ..............49 Table 2.7 Sizes of Agricultural Production Areas ........................................................................50 Table 2.8 Greenhouse areas in Alaçam, Bafra, and Ondokuzmayıs districts ...........................50 Table 2.9 Annual number of bovine animals and animal production in Alaçam, Bafra, and Ondokuzmayıs districts ..................................................................................................................51 Table 2.10 Variation of the number of water buffaloes in the delta between years 1990–201755 Table 3.1 The socio-economical status set according to the interviews made with the village headmen ...........................................................................................................................................58 Table 4.1 Priority Plant Species for Protection in the Kızılırmak Delta......................................67 Table 4.2 Priority Bird Species for Protection in the Kızılırmak Delta .......................................67 Table 4.3 Priority Reptilian Species for Protection in the Kızılırmak Delta ...............................68
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Production of Aphanius Mento (Heckel, 1843) Under Controlled Conditions
    Aquaculture, Aquarium, Conservation & Legislation OPEN ACCESS International Journal of the Bioflux Society Research Article Production of Aphanius mento (Heckel, 1843) under controlled conditions 1Soner Sezen, 2Murtaza Olmez 1 Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock Mediterranean Fisheries Research Production and Training, Antalya, Turkey. 2 Suleyman Demirel University Egirdir Fisheries Faculty, Isparta, Turkey. Abstract. In this study, it was aimed to determine the adaptation capability to controlled conditions, reproductive behaviors, and production of Aphanius mento caught from Kirkgoz Springs, Antalya. Fish material for broodstock were caught using fine mesh tulle net and bag net with 2.5 mm mesh size. Twenty five female and 10 male breeding fish acclimated to experimental conditions in Aquarium Department Unit of Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock Mediterranean Fisheries Research Production and Training Institute were spawned by providing egg collec- tors to the tank. Aphanius mento eggs were spherical, transparent and sticky. Examination with the microscope revealed that the eggs were full of pale yellow egg yolk with 7-8 lipid droplets and had fibrous sticking filaments on the surface. The average egg diameter was 1.59±0.50 mm (n=8). Hatching were observed at 11th day at 22.5±1.0ºC water temperature whereas at 8th day at 27.0±0.45ºC. Total length of newly hatched larvae was 5.1±0.07 mm, and swimming were competed at 4th day. Average size of one-week larvae was 5.6±0.2 mm. At this stage fins were fully developed, the larvae were able to swim freely and take exogenous food. Mean length of the fish was 2.7±0.2 cm on 7th month and a ju- venile fish had an appearance of morphologically mature fish.
    [Show full text]
  • Karyological Analysis of Some Species of Aphanius (Osteichthyes: Cyprinodontidae) from Anatolia
    Pakistan J. Zool., vol. 46(5), pp. 1271-1275, 2014. Karyological Analysis of Some Species of Aphanius (Osteichthyes: Cyprinodontidae) From Anatolia Muhammet Gaffaroğlu1, Muradiye Karasu Ayata1*, Sevgi Ünal2 and Mustafa Özkan1 1Department of Biology, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Ahi Evran University, 40100 Kırşehir, Turkey 2Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Gazi University, 06100 Ankara, Turkey Abstract.- In this study, chromosomal studies were carried out on four species of the genus Aphanius (Osteichthyes, Cyprinodontidae). Metaphase chromosomes were obtained from kidney cells. The diploid chromosome numbers of Aphanius anatoliae, A. danfordii, A. splendens and A. villwocki were 2n=48, and consisted of three pairs of submetacentric and 21 pairs of subtelocentric chromosomes. The arm number (NF) was 54. Constitutive heterochromatin regions were observed on the centromeres of chromosomes in all four species by using C-banding. Nucleolus organizer regions (NOR) were observed on the short arms of two pairs of chromosomes. It is believed that the data obtained will make a contribution to fish cytogenetics. Key words: Aphanius, chromosome, C-banding, NOR INTRODUCTION There has been no a detailed study on the cytogenetic features of these species although only haploid chromosome number has been reported in The family Cyprinodontidae is distributed A. anatoliae (Öztan, 1954; Wildekamp, 1993). throughout the United States, Africa, Southern The purpose of this study is to reveal the Europe and Asia. It is represented by a genus in our chromosomal features (with Giemsa, Ag-NOR country (Geldiay and Balık, 2007). The genus staining and C-banding) of four species (A. Aphanius Nardo, 1827 has 10 species in Anatolia.
    [Show full text]
  • An Updated List of Taxonomy, Distribution and Conservation Status (Teleostei: Cyprinodontoidea)
    Iran. J. Ichthyol. (March 2018), 5(1): 1–29 Received: January 5, 2018 © 2018 Iranian Society of Ichthyology Accepted: March 1, 2018 P-ISSN: 2383-1561; E-ISSN: 2383-0964 doi: 10.22034/iji.v5i1.267 http://www.ijichthyol.org Review Article Cyprinodontid fishes of the world: an updated list of taxonomy, distribution and conservation status (Teleostei: Cyprinodontoidea) Hamid Reza ESMAEILI1*, Tayebeh ASRAR1, Ali GHOLAMIFARD2 1Ichthyology and Molecular Systematics Research Laboratory, Zoology Section, Department of Biology, College of Sciences, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran. 2Department of Biology, Faculty of Sciences, Lorestan University, 6815144316 Khorramabad, Iran. Email: [email protected] Abstract: This checklist aims to list all the reported cyprinodontid fishes (superfamily Cyprinodontoidea/pupfishes) of the world. It lists 141 species in 8 genera and 4 families. The most diverse family is Cyprinodontidae (54 species, 38%), followed by Orestiidae (45 species, 32%), Aphaniidae (39 species, 28%), and Cubanichthyidae (3 species, 2%). Among 141 listed species, 73 (51.8%) species are Not Evaluated (NE), 15 (10.6%) Least Concern (LC), 9 (6.4%) Vulnerable (VU), 3 (2.1%) Data Deficient (DD), 11 (7.8%) Critically Endangered (CR), 4 (2.8%) Near Threatened (NT), 18 (12.8%) Endangered (EN), 3 (2.1%) Extinct in the Wild (EW) and 5 (3.5%) Extinct of the Red List of IUCN. They inhabit in the fresh, brackish and marine waters of the United States, Middle America, the West Indies, parts of northern South America, North Africa, the Mediterranean Anatolian region, coastal areas of the Persian Gulf and Makran Sea (Oman Sea), the northern Arabian Sea east to Gujarat in India, and some endorheic basins of Iran, Pakistan and the Arabian Peninsula.
    [Show full text]
  • Freshwater Fishes of Turkey: a Revised and Updated Annotated Checklist
    BIHAREAN BIOLOGIST 9 (2): 141-157 ©Biharean Biologist, Oradea, Romania, 2015 Article No.: 151306 http://biozoojournals.ro/bihbiol/index.html Freshwater fishes of Turkey: a revised and updated annotated checklist Erdoğan ÇIÇEK1,*, Sevil Sungur BIRECIKLIGIL1 and Ronald FRICKE2 1. Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi, Faculty of Art and Sciences, Department of Biology, 50300, Nevşehir, Turkey. E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] 2. Im Ramstal 76, 97922 Lauda-Königshofen, Germany, and Staatliches Museum für Naturkunde, Rosenstein 1, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany. E-Mail: [email protected] *Corresponding author, E. Çiçek, E-mail: [email protected] Received: 24. August 2015 / Accepted: 16. October 2015 / Available online: 20. November 2015 / Printed: December 2015 Abstract. The current status of the inland waters ichthyofauna of Turkey is revised, and an updated checklist of the freshwater fishes is presented. A total of 368 fish species live in the inland waters of Turkey. Among these, 3 species are globally extinct, 5 species are extinct in Turkey, 28 species are non-native and 153 species are considered as endemic to Turkey. We recognise pronounced species richness and a high degree of endemism of the Turkish ichthyofauna (41.58%). Orders with the largest numbers of species in the ichthyofauna of Turkey are the Cypriniformes 247 species), Perciformes (43 species), Salmoniformes (21 species), Cyprinodontiformes (15 species), Siluriformes (10 species), Acipenseriformes (8 species) and Clupeiformes (8 species). At the family level, the Cyprinidae has the greatest number of species (188 species; 51.1% of the total species), followed by the Nemacheilidae (39), Salmonidae (21 species), Cobitidae (20 species), Gobiidae (18 species) and Cyprinodontidea (14 species).
    [Show full text]
  • Ichthyofauna of Sultan Marshes (Turkey) and Possible Effects of Fish Invasion from Seyhan Basin on Diversity and Conservation Erdoğan ÇIÇEK1, Sevil SUNGUR*,2
    Çiçek & Sungur, (2020) Comm. J. Biol. 4(2): 115-120 e-ISSN 2602-456X DOI: 10.31594/commagene.817306 Research Article / Araştırma Makalesi Ichthyofauna of Sultan Marshes (Turkey) and Possible Effects of Fish Invasion from Seyhan Basin on Diversity and Conservation Erdoğan ÇIÇEK1, Sevil SUNGUR*,2 1Department of Biology, Faculty of Art and Sciences, Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli University, 50300, Nevşehir, Turkey. 2Health Services Vocational School, Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli University, 50300, Nevşehir, Turkey. ORCID ID: Erdoğan ÇİÇEK: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5334-5737; Sevil SUNGUR: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4018-6375 Received: 27.10.2020 Accepted: 29.10.2020 Published online: 30.10.2020 Issue published: 31.12.2020 Abstract: Ichthyofauna of the Sultan Marshes and its drainage based on an extensive survey are presented. In addition, the suggestion of the IUCN criteria of the recently described fish species and the ecological quality of the marshes based on the EurAsian Fish Index (EAFI) were estimated. Furthermore, Capoeta damascina, Garra turcica, Squalius seyhanensis, and Oxynoemacheilus seyhanensis are reported for the first time in the Sultan Marshes, entered from the Seyhan basin via the Zamanti Tunnel. Based on the results, a total of 16 species belonging to 6 families have been identified with 9 translocated ones (58.3%). The estimated EAFI value for different parts of the marshes differs from 4 (Bad) to 30 (High) with a mean of 21.0 (Good) that shows the negative effect of both anthropogenic deterioration and occurrence of translocated species. Keywords: Kızılırmak basin, Kayseri, fish index, translocated, ecological impact. Sultan Sazlığı Balık Faunası ve Seyhan Havzasından Giriş Yapan Balık Türlerinin Çeşitlilik ve Korunma Üzerine Olası Etkileri Öz: Sultan Sazlığı havzasının balık faunası kapsamlı olarak ele alınmıştır.
    [Show full text]
  • Redalyc.Trichodina Modesta: an Exotic Ciliate in the Neotropical
    Revista Brasileira de Parasitologia Veterinária ISSN: 0103-846X [email protected] Colégio Brasileiro de Parasitologia Veterinária Brasil Moraes Ramos Valladão, Gustavo; Giannecchini, Luiz Gustavo; Laterça Martins, Maurício; Benites de Pádua, Santiago Trichodina modesta: an exotic ciliate in the Neotropical region parasitizing an unusual host Revista Brasileira de Parasitologia Veterinária, vol. 24, núm. 2, abril-junio, 2015, pp. 162- 167 Colégio Brasileiro de Parasitologia Veterinária Jaboticabal, Brasil Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=397841496007 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative Original Article Braz. J. Vet. Parasitol., Jaboticabal, v. 24, n. 2, p. 162-167, abr.-jun. 2015 ISSN 0103-846X (Print) / ISSN 1984-2961 (Electronic) Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1984-29612015024 Trichodina modesta: an exotic ciliate in the Neotropical region parasitizing an unusual host Trichodina modesta: exótico ciliado na região Neotropical parasitando hospedeiro não usual Gustavo Moraes Ramos Valladão1; Luiz Gustavo Giannecchini2; Maurício Laterça Martins3*; Santiago Benites de Pádua4 1Laboratório de Patologia de Organismos Aquáticos – LAPOA, Centro de Aquicultura, Universidade Estadual Paulista – CAUNESP, Jaboticabal, SP, Brazil 2Laboratório de Peixes Ornamentais, Centro de Aquicultura, Universidade Estadual Paulista – CAUNESP, Jaboticabal, SP, Brazil 3Laboratório de Sanidade de Organismos Aquáticos – AQUOS, Departamento de Aquicultura, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina – UFSC, Florianópolis, SC, Brazil 4Aquivet Saúde Aquática, São José do Rio Preto, SP, Brazil Received January 13, 2015 Accepted February 5, 2015 Abstract In this study, an important ornamental fish,Betta splendens (Osphronemidae), from three different Brazilian states was examined for parasitic infestations.
    [Show full text]
  • Endemic Freshwater Fishes of Turkey
    FishTaxa (2018) 3(4): 1-39 E-ISSN: 2458-942X Journal homepage: www.fishtaxa.com © 2018 FISHTAXA. All rights reserved Endemic freshwater fishes of Turkey Erdoğan ÇIÇEK*,1, Ronald FRICKE2, Sevil SUNGUR3, Soheil EAGDERI4 1Department of Biology, Faculty of Art and Sciences, Nevşehir Hacı BektaşVeli University, 50300, Nevşehir, Turkey. 2Im Ramstal 76, 97922 Lauda-Königshofen, Germany. 3Health Services Vocational School, Nevşehir Hacı BektaşVeli University, 50300, Nevşehir, Turkey. 4Department of Fisheries, Faculty of Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran. Corresponding author: *E-mail: [email protected] Abstract Turkey shows a notable diversity of habitats, with significant variations in altitude, rainfall, temperature, topography and geological history, which is reflected in its richness of biodiversity. Although there are quite a number of publications on the freshwater fish taxonomy, the data set for endemic freshwater fish as assemblages are poor. According to recent findings, a total of 194 endemic freshwater fish species are now recognised within the political boundaries of Turkey. Endemic fish consist of 47.4% of the Turkish freshwater ichthyofauna (409 species). At the family level, the Cyprinidae comprises the greatest number of endemic species (110 species; 56.7% of the endemic species), followed by the Nemacheilidae (31 species; 16.0%), Cyprinodontidae (18 species; 9.3%), Cobitidae (14 species; 7.2%), Salmonidae (12 species; 6.2%), Gobiidae (7 species; 3.6%), Petromyzontidae (1 species; 0.5%) and Clupeidae (1 species; 0.5%). A total of 143 species (73.71%) are found within a single basin. Considering species diversity, the Konya endorheic basin (64.10%) is the richest in endemics, followed by Burdur (52.38%), Büyük Menderes (40.28%), Van Gölü (38.46%) and Antalya (34.00%).
    [Show full text]
  • Aphanius Marassantensis, a New Toothcarp from the Kızılırmak Drainage in Northern Anatolia (Cyprinodontiformes: Cyprinodontidae)
    Zootaxa 3887 (5): 569–582 ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ Article ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2014 Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3887.5.4 http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:4E7FB25C-6B88-4AF6-8F6C-6DC96B00B55C Aphanius marassantensis, a new toothcarp from the Kızılırmak drainage in northern Anatolia (Cyprinodontiformes: Cyprinodontidae) S. JOHANNES PFLEIDERER, MATTHIAS F. GEIGER & FABIAN HERDER Zoologisches Forschungsmuseum Alexander Koenig, Leibniz Institute for Animal Biodiversity, Adenauerallee 160, 53113 Bonn, Ger- many. E-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract Aphanius marassantensis, new species, is described from the Kızılırmak River drainage in northern Anatolia based on colouration, meristic and morphometric characters, and the mtDNA COI barcode region. It is distinguished from other Anatolian Aphanius by one or several of the following characters: a stout body shape (BD/SL 28.2–39.6%), complete scale cover, and 25–28 scales along the lateral line. Males have 8–13 dark-brown lateral bars, of which the antepenultimate bar anterior to the caudal-fin base is 0.9–1.8 times wider than the anterior white interspace, 2–3 vertical rows of spots on the caudal fin, a black dorsal fin, sometimes with a narrow whitish-grey base, a white anal fin with 1–3 rows of black spots, in some individuals with a black margin, and hyaline pelvic fins. Females do not have vertical rows of dark-brown spots on caudal or anal fins, but numerous dark-brown spots on the flanks, arranged in 1–3 lateral rows behind a vertical from the dorsal-fin base.
    [Show full text]
  • Trichodinid Parasites (Protozoa: Ciliophora: Peritrichida) of Invasive Gobiid Fish Inhabiting the Lower Kızılırmak Delta in Samsun, Turkey
    Pakistan J. Zool., vol. 45(6), pp. 1517-1524, 2013 Trichodinid Parasites (Protozoa: Ciliophora: Peritrichida) of Invasive Gobiid Fish Inhabiting The Lower Kızılırmak Delta in Samsun, Turkey Türkay Öztürk* and Arzu Çam Fisheries and Aquaculture Faculty, Sinop University, 57000 Sinop, Turkey Abstract.- The trichodinid fauna of three gobiid species, the monkey goby Neogobius fluviatilis (Pallas, 1814), the tubenose goby Proterorhinus marmoratus (Pallas, 1814) and the marbled goby Pomatoschistus marmoratus (Risso, 1810) collected from the Lower Kızılırmak Delta in Samsun, Turkey were investigated during December 2010-November 2011. Three trichodinid species including Trichodina domerguei Wallengren, 1897, Trichodina heterodentata Duncan, 1977 and Paratrichodina corlissi Lom et Haldar, 1977 were identified on 222 gobiid fish specimens. The existence of trichodinid parasites in relation to the body parts of three gobiid species as well as their seasonal occurrences were determined and discussed. This paper is the first report on the trichodinid fauna on the monkey goby, the tubenose goby and the marbled goby in Turkey. Trichodina heterodentata Duncan, 1977 and Paratrichodina corlissi Lom et Haldar, 1977 are new records for Turkish fish parasite fauna, while T. heterodentata is a new parasite record for Neogobius fluviatilis, Proterorhinus marmoratus and Pomatoschistus marmoratus. Key words: Trichodina heterodentata, T. domerguei, Paratrichodina corlissi, gobiid fishes. INTRODUCTION 1977; Grupcheva and Lom, 1980; Van As and Basson, 1989; Asmat and Sultana, 2005; Mitra and Haldar, 2005; Mitra and Bondyopadhyay, 2006). To Gobiidae is distributed worldwide in both date in Turkey, there is only one published study on marine and freshwater habitats and the majority of the trichodinids of Neogobius melanostomus, which species are invasive (Miller, 2004).
    [Show full text]
  • Spatial Heterogeneity in the Mediterranean Biodiversity Hotspot Affects Barcoding Accuracy of Its Freshwater fishes
    Molecular Ecology Resources (2014) doi: 10.1111/1755-0998.12257 Spatial heterogeneity in the Mediterranean Biodiversity Hotspot affects barcoding accuracy of its freshwater fishes M. F. GEIGER,1 F. HERDER,1 M. T. MONAGHAN,2 V. ALMADA,3 R. BARBIERI,4 M. BARICHE,5 P. BERREBI,6 J. BOHLEN,7 M. CASAL-LOPEZ,8 G. B. DELMASTRO,9 G. P. J. DENYS,10 A. DETTAI,10 € I. DOADRIO,8 E. KALOGIANNI,4 H. KARST,11 M. KOTTELAT,12 M. KOVACIC,13 M. LAPORTE,6,14 € M. LORENZONI,15 Z. MARCIC,16 M. OZULUG,17 A. PERDICES,8 S. PEREA,8 H. PERSAT,18 S. PORCELOTTI,19 C. PUZZI,20 J. ROBALO,3 R. SANDA,21 M. SCHNEIDER,11 V. SLECHTOVA,7 M. STOUMBOUDI,4 S. WALTER1 and J. FREYHOF 1,2 1Zoologisches Forschungsmuseum Alexander Koenig, Leibniz Institute for Animal Biodiversity, Adenauerallee 160, 53113 Bonn, Germany, 2Leibniz-Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries, Muggelseedamm€ 301 & 310, 12587 Berlin, Germany, 3Eco-Ethology Research Unit, ISPA-Instituto Universitario, Rua Jardim do Tabaco, 34, 1149-041, Lisbon, Portugal, 4Hellenic Centre for Marine Research, 46.7 km Athens Sounio ave., P.C. 19013 Anavyssos, Greece, 5American University of Beirut, Riad El 6 Solh, 1107 2020 Beirut, Lebanon, Institut des Sciences de l’Evolution de Montpellier, Place Eugene Bataillon – Universite Montpellier 2, 34095 Montpellier Cedex 05, France, 7Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics, Libechov Rumburska 89, 277 21 Libechov, Czech Republic, 8National Museum of Natural History, Jose Gutierrez Abascal 2, 28006 Madrid, Spain, 9Natural History Museum, Cascina Vigna via San Francesco di Sales 188, 10022 Carmagnola, Italy, 10Museum national d’Histoire naturelle, 57 Rue Cuvier, 75005 Paris, France, 11Deutsche Killifischgemeinschaft e.V., 65183 Wiesbaden, Germany, 12Route de la Baroche, 2952, Cornol, Switzerland, 13Natural History Museum Rijeka, Lorenzov prolaz 1, 51000 Rijeka, Croatia, 14Centre de Recherche sur les 15 Interactions Bassins Versants – Ecosystemes Aquatiques, C.P.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Background of the Trust
    TRANSYLVANIAN REVIEW OF SYSTEMATICAL AND ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH 16.1 The Wetlands Diversity Editors Angela Curtean-Bănăduc & Doru Bănăduc Sibiu - Romania 2014 TRANSYLVANIAN REVIEW OF SYSTEMATICAL AND ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH 16.1 The Wetlands Diversity Editors Angela Curtean-Bănăduc & Doru Bănăduc “Lucian Blaga” University of Sibiu, Faculty of Sciences, Department of Ecology and Environment Protection Published based mainly on some of the scientific materials presented at the fourth “Aquatic Biodiversity International Conference” - Sibiu/Romania 2013 East and South “Lucian Blaga” International Ecotur Sibiu European network for University Association N.G.O. Invasive Alien Species of Sibiu for Danube Research Sibiu - Romania 2014 Scientifical Reviewers John Robert AKEROYD Sherkin Island Marine Station, Sherkin Island - Ireland. Doru BĂNĂDUC “Lucian Blaga” University of Sibiu, Sibiu - Romania. Jürg BLOESCH International Association for Danube Research, Dübendorf - Switzerland. Swaranjit Singh CAMEOTRA Institute of Microbial Technology, Chandigarht - India. Kevin CIANFAGLIONE University of Camerino, Camerino - Italy. Angela CURTEAN-BĂNĂDUC “Lucian Blaga” University of Sibiu, Sibiu - Romania. Jenny DAY University of Cape Town, Rhodes Gift, Western Cape - South Africa. Laurisse FRAMPTON Australian Rivers Institute, Griffith University, Nathan, Queensland - Australia. Marian-Traian GOMOIU Romanian Academy, Bucharest - Romania. Georg Albert JANAUER University of Vienna, Vienna - Austria. Mike JOY Te Kura Matauranga o nga Taonga a Papatuanuku Massey University, Palmerston North - New Zealand. Maria LEICHTFRIED Institute for Limnology, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Mondsee - Austria. Mirjana LENHARDT Institute for Biological Research, Belgrade - Serbia. Eugenia LÓPEZ-LÓPEZ National School of Biological Sciences, National Polytechnic Institute, México D. F. - México. Weronika MAŚLANKO University of Life Science of Lublin, Lublin - Poland. Eckbert SCHNEIDER Institute for Waters and River Basin Management, Karlsruhe University, Rastatt - Germay.
    [Show full text]
  • Molecular Phylogeny and Historical Biogeography of the Aphanius (Pisces, Cyprinodontiformes) Species Complex of Central Anatolia, Turkey
    MOLECULAR PHYLOGENETICS AND EVOLUTION Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 25 (2002) 125–137 www.academicpress.com Molecular phylogeny and historical biogeography of the Aphanius (Pisces, Cyprinodontiformes) species complex of central Anatolia, Turkey Tomas Hrbek,a,* Fahrettin Kuuc€ßuuk,€ b Tancred Frickey,c Kai N. Stoolting,€ a Rudolph H. Wildekamp,d and Axel Meyera a Department of Biology, University of Konstanz, Konstanz 78457, Germany b Su€leyman Demirel University, Egirdir Su U€ru€nlerı Faku€ltesi, Egirdir 32500, Turkey c Max Plank Institut Entwicklungsbiologie, Abt I, Tuebingen 72076, Germany d Royal Museum of Central Africa, Vertebrate Section, Tervuren 3080, Belgium Received 2 August 2001; received in revised form 28 January 2002 Abstract Phylogenetic relationships of a subset of Aphanius fish comprising central Anatolia, Turkey, are investigated to test the hy- pothesis of geographic speciation driven by early Pliocene orogenic events in spite of morphological similarity. We use 3434 aligned base pairs of mitochondrial DNA from 42 samples representing 36 populations of three species and six outgroup species to test this hypothesis. Genes analyzed include those encoding the 12S and 16S ribosomal RNAs; transfer RNAs coding for valine, leucine, isoleucine, glutamine, methionine, tryptophan, alanine, asparagine, cysteine, and tyrosine; and complete NADH dehydrogenase subunits I and II. Distance based minimum evolution and maximum-likelihood analyses identify six well-supported clades con- sisting of Aphanius danfordii, Aphanius sp. aff danfordii, and four clades of Aphanius anatoliae. Parsimony analysis results in 462 equally parsimonious trees, all of which contain the six well supported clades identified in the other analyses. Our phylogenetic results are supported by hybridization studies (Villwock, 1964), and by the geological history of Anatolia.
    [Show full text]