International Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Studies 2016; 4(3): 109-118

ISSN: 2347-5129 (ICV-Poland) Impact Value: 5.62 (GIF) Impact Factor: 0.352 Ichthyo fauna and hydrophyte floral diversity in the IJFAS 2016; 4(3): 109-118 at district, © 2016 IJFAS www.fisheriesjournal.com (Telangana State) Received: 04-03-2016 Accepted: 05-04-2016 Rama Rao K, Leela B Rama Rao K Department of Zoology, Govt. Degree College, Satavahana Abstract University , Fish and Hydrophytes bio diversity in the Lower Manair Dam was studied from November-2014 to , , October-2015. Fish samples were collected once in every fortnight with help of local fishermen by using India. fishing Craft and Gear. A total of 66 species of fishes belonging to 9 orders such as Cypriniformes (27 species), Siluriformes (13species), Perciformes (15 species), Channiformes (4 species), Beloniformes (2 Leela B species), Anguilliformes (2 species), Osteoglossiformes (one species), Cyprinodontiformes (One species) Department of Zoology, Govt. and Mugiliformes (one species). The number and percentage composition of population status were Degree College, Satavahana calculated to 32.81% common, 29.69% abundant, 21.86% moderate, and 15.63% rare species were University Jammikunta, identified in the Lower Manair Dam. Of these, 52 species of fish were least concerned (LC), 5 were data Karimnagar District, Telangana, deficient (DD), 3 were near threaten (NT), 3 were not evaluate (NE), 2 species of fish were endangered India. (ED) and 1 species of fish was vulnerable (VU). Forty eight different species of aquatic macrophytes

were recorded in 04 classes, 20 orders and 26 families, which include five free floating macrophytes, ten submerged, and thirty three emergent species of weds were recorded. The percentage composition of class, order and families were calculated during the period. IUCN (2015.4), CAMP (1998) status and Shannon-Weiner diversity (H-), Evenness (E), Hmax = ln(S), Maximum diversity possible and species richness (S) for different months were calculated.

Keywords: Fishes diversity, Macrophytes, Shannon-Weiner diversity (H-), Evenness (E) and species richness (S), Hmax = ln(S) Maximum diversity possible.

1. Introduction The Lower Manair Dam (LMD) is located on the Manair River at 18°24' N latitude and 79° 20' E longitude in Karimnagar District at 146 Km. of . The Manair River is a tributary of the and the dam is built across the river at the confluence with Mohedamada River. The dam drains a catchment area of 6,464 square kilometres (2,496 sq mi) which includes 1,797.46 square kilometres (694.00 sq mi) of free catchment and

the balance is intercepted catchment. It is an earth cum masonry dam. The dam height above the deepest foundation is 41 metres (135 ft); the maximum height of the earth dam is 88 feet (27 m). The dam length is 10,471 metres (34,354 ft) and top width is 24 feet (7.3 m). It has a volume content of 5.41 million cum with a reservoir water spread area of 81 square kilometres (31 sq mi) at FRL of 920.00 ft. The gross storage capacity of the reservoir is 680 million cubic

meter and the live storage capacity is 380.977 million cum. While the maximum observed flood discharge is reported to be 9,910 cubic metres (350,000 cu ft)/second. The storage behind the dam serves as a balancing reservoir for the Kakatiya Canal and regulates flow for irrigation. The command area for irrigation is 163,000 hectares (400,000 acres). The storage of the dam is also utilized as drinking water source for Karimnagar and towns and for [1] reservoir fisheries . Indian region fishes are about 2500 species; freshwater fishes 930 species and remaining 1570 are marine [2]. Biodiversity is the degree of variation of life forms within a given ecosystem, Correspondence biodiversity is essential for stabilization of ecosystem protection of overall environmental Rama Rao K quality for understanding intrinsic worth of all species on the earth represented [3]. The rapid Department of Zoology, Govt. Degree College, Satavahana environment change on earth therefore has its impact on the biodiversity, that’s why the united University Jammikunta, nation declares the year 2010 as the international year of biodiversity. India consists of six Karimnagar District, Telangana, drainage system. These are system, upland cold water bodies, Gangetic river India. system, system, east flowing river system, and west flowing systems [4]. ~ 109 ~ International Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Studies

In this river ecosystem fishes play a very important role to fixed in the solution in separate glass jars according to size. maintain ecosystem. Fish biodiversity of river essentially Smaller fishes were directly placed in the 10% formalin, represents the fish faunal diversity and their abundance. River whereas larger fishes were given an incision on the abdomen conserves a rich variety of fish species which support to the and removed the gut content before they were preserved. commercial fisheries. The Ichthyo faunal Diversity of Dhaura Identification and classification was carried out based on keys Reservoir at Kichha [5]. And check list - freshwater fishes of for fishes of the Indian subcontinent [15-21]. Identification of the India, Records of the Zoological Survey of India [6]. species was done mainly on the morphometric and Lower Manair Dam had been rich fish productivity and in meristematic characters. Macrophytes were collected during multi-dimensional utilization of aquatic weeds. The fresh three different seasons such as monsoon, winter and summer water aquatic weeds are directly or indirectly more helpful for season by field visit to the spots. The survey was conducted to food and shelter to reservoir fishery at Lower Manair Dam. collect the information regarding floating, emergent, and They also serve as a potential source of energy [7]. submerged vegetation. The macrophytes were collected by Macrophytes of different water bodies in India are studied by hand picking, and also using nets and then brought to researchers [8-11] and many more. The two most common laboratory preserved in 10% formalin and identified using measures of species diversity index are Simpson index and standard available literature [22]. Shannon-Weiner index. The Simpson index is the measure of diversity which takes into account both the number of species 2.1. Statistical Analysis and the evenness of occurrence of individuals in the various The mathematical expression of Shannon - Wiener Diversity species. It is an expression of the number of times one would Index as have to take pairs of individuals at random from the entire Shannon-Wiener Index denoted by H = -SUM [(pi) × ln (pi)] aggregation to find a pair from the species. Shannon-Weiner whereas Index is a widely employed index and it is also an expression of how many equally abundant species would have diversity SUM = summation equal to that in the observed collection. pi = proportion of total sample represented by species i Divide no. of individuals of species i by total number of samples S = number of species, = species richness Hmax = ln(S) Maximum diversity possible E = Evenness = H/Hmax

3. Results and Discussion The results of this study revealed that the occurrence of sixty six fish species belong to nine orders, 20 families and 41 genera. List of LMD fish including their order, family, genus, species, common name, vernacular name, IUCN and CAMP status were recorded in the present investigation was given in Table 1. Out of 66 species recorded from Lower Manair Dam

five exotic species are available. (* indicates exotic fish Fig 1: Lower Manair Dam Map (Google Courtesy) species in the table). Earlier studies were dissimilarly reported that 44 species [23]. And 64 species were available in the 2. Materials and Methods Lower Manair Dam [24]. The freshwater fish diversity, status Fish samples were collected from different corners of LMD and strategies were reported by various researchers including surrounding areas with the help of fishermen, fish collectors, exotic fishes, belonging to order, family, genera and species local fish markets, and also fish sellers. The photographs of percentage composition was vary in Lower Manair Dam, the collected fishes were taken at fresh condition immediately Parbhani reservoir, Ibrahimbagh reservoir and Hirakud and preserved in 10% formalin without any post-mortem reservoirs [25-30]. stages [12-14]. Sample fishes were brought to the laboratory and

Table 1: List of fishes and their order, family, genus, species, population status, IUCN and CAMP status at Lower Manair Dam

Order / Family No. Scientific Name Population Status IUCN Status (2014.2) CAMP Status Osteoglossiformes/ I 1. Notopteridae (1) 1 Notopterus notopterus C LC LRnt Cypriniformies/ II 2. Cyprinidae (24) 2 Catla catla C LC LRnt 3 Labeo ariza C LC NE 4 Labeo bata R LC LRnt 5 Labeo calbasu A LC LRnt 6 Labeo fimbriatus M LC LRnt 7 Labeo porcellus R LC DD 8 Labeo rohita C LC LRnt 9 Cirrhinus mrigala C LC LRnt 10 Cirrhinus reba A LC VU 11* Ctenopharyngodon idella R LC NE 12 Garra gotyla gotyla R LC A1 ac 13* Cyprinus carpio M VU NE ~ 110 ~ International Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Studies

14 Osteobrama cotio cotio A LC LRnt 15 Puntius chola A LC VU 16 Puntius ticto A LC LRnt 17 Puntius sarana sarana A LC VU 18 Puntius sophore A LC LRnt 19 Rasbora daniconius M LC LRnt 20 Rasbora elanga M LC NE 21 Salmostoma bacaila A LC DD 22 Salmostoma phulo C NE NE 23 Amblypharyngodon microlepis A LC NE 24 Amblypharyngodon mola A LC LRlc 25 Danio devario C EN NE 3. Cobitidae (3) 26 Lepidocephalichthys berdmorei M EN NE 27 Lepidocephalus guntea M LC NE 28 Schistura corica R LC NE Cyprinodontiformes/ III 4. Aplocheilus (1) 29 Aplocheilus panchax C LC DD Siluriformes/ IV 5.Bagridae (6) 30 Mystus bleeker A LC VU 31 Mystus cavasius A LC LRnt 32 Mystus tengara A LC NE 33 Mystus vittatus A LC VU 34 Spherata seenghala A LC DD 35 Spherata oar A LC DD 6.Siluridae (2) 36 Ompok bimaculatus C NT EN 37 Wallago attu C NT LRnt 7.Schibeidae (2) 38 Eutropiichthys vacha C LC VU 39 Pseudeutropius atherinoides C LC NE 8.Claridae (2) 40 Clarias batrachus R LC NE 41* Clarias gariepinus R DD DD 9.Heteropneustidae (1) 42 Heteropneustes fossilis M LC VU Anguilliformes/ V 10. Anguillidae (2) 43 Anguilla bengalensis bengalensis M LC EN 44 Anguilla bicolor bicolor R LC EN Beloniformes/ VI 11. Belonidae (1) 45 Xenentodon cancila C LC LRnt 12. Exocoetidae (1) 46 Hyporhamphus gaimardi C DD NE Channiformes/ VII 13. Channidae (4) 47 Channa marulius M LC LRnt 48 Channa orienalis C NE VU 49 Channa panctatus C LC LRnt 50 Channa striatus C LC LRnt Perciformes/ VIII 14. Gobiidae (3) 51 Glossogobius giuris A LC LRnt 52 Gobiopsis macrostoma R LC LRnt 53 Awaous grammepomus R LC NE 15. Mastacembelidae (2) 54 Mastacembelus armatus A LC VU 55 Mastacembelus pancalus A LC LRnt 16. Anabantidae (3) 56 Trichogaster faciatus M LC LRnt 57 Colisa lalio C LC NE 58 Anabas testudineus M DD DD 17. Nandidae (1) 59 Nandus nandus M LC LRnt 18. Cichlidae (4) 60* Oreochromis mossambicus C NT NE 61* Oreochromis variables R DD DD 62 Etroplus suratensis C LC NE 63 Etroplus maculatus M LC NE 19. Ambassidae (2) 64 Chanda nama C LC NE 65 Ambassis ranga M LC NE Mugiliformes IX 20. Mugilidae (1) 66 Rhinomugil corsula C LC NE A= Abundant (76-100%); C = Common (51-75%); M = Moderate (26-50%); R = Rare (1-25%) of the total catch. EN- Endangered; VU- Vulnerable: LRnt- Lower risk near threatened; LRlc- Lower risk least concern; LC- Least concern; DD- Data Deficient; NE- Not evaluated, NT: Near threaten. *Exotic fishes NOs: 11, 13, 41, 60 and 61

The number and percentage composition of families, genera by Perciformes with 15 (22.73%), Siluriformes 13 (19.70%), and species under different orders are shown in Table 2 and Channiformes 04 (6.06%), Anguilliformes and Beloniformes Fig 2. Order cypriniformes was dominant with 27 species each with 02 (3.03%), Osteoglossiformes, which contributed to 40.91% of the total 66 species followed Cyprinodontiformes and Mugiliformes each with 01 (1.55%). ~ 111 ~ International Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Studies

Recorded families out of 20, Perciformes contributed 06 Mugiliformes are found out respectively with 01 (2.44%) in (30.00%) families followed by Siluriformes 05 (25.00%), Lower Manair Dam. Tirupataiah and Rama Rao reported that Cypriniformes and Beloniformes each with 02 (10.00%), the number and percentage composition of families, genera Osteoglossiformes, Cyprinodontiformes, Anguilliformes, and species under different orders are dissimilar [23, 24]. It was Channiformes and Mugiliformes each with 01 (05.00%). found out that the fishes belonging to nine orders, twenty one Recorded genera out of 41, Cypriniformes contributed to 14 families and 53 species of 37 different genera were collected (34.15%), Perciformes 12 (29.27%), Siluriformes 08 in the Godavari River during January 2008 to December 2009 (19.51%), Beloniformes 02 (4.88%), Osteoglossiformes, [31]. Cyprinodontiformes, Anguilliformes, Channiformes and

Table 2: Number and percent composition of families, genera and species of fishes under various orders

S. % of families in % of genera in % of species in Orders Families genus Species No an order an order an order 1 Osteoglossiformes 01 01 01 5.00 2.44 1.55 2 Cypriniformes 02 14 27 10.00 34.15 40.91 3 Cyprinodontiformes 01 01 01 5.00 2.44 1.55 4 Siluriformes 05 08 13 25.00 19.51 19.70 5 Anguilliformes 01 01 02 5.00 2.44 3.03 6 Beloniformes 02 02 02 10.00 4.88 3.03 7 Channiformes 01 01 04 5.00 2.44 6.06 8 Perciformes 06 12 15 30.00 29.27 22.73 9 Mugiliformes 01 01 01 5.00 2.44 1.55 Total 20 41 66

The number and percent composition of genera and species family Cyprinidae that made up to 36.36%, 6 species to under various families are represented in Table-3 and Fig. 3. family Bagridae that contributed to 9.09%, four species each The generic composition of fishes belonging to different to families Channidae and Cichlidae contributed to 06.06%, families shown that 12 genera under Cyprinidae contributed three species to family Cobitidae, Gobiidae, and Anabantidae to 29.27%, three genera each under Gobiidae, and constituted 04.55%, two species to families Siluridae, Anabantidae contributed to 7.32%, two genera each under Schilbeidae, Clariidae, Anguillidae, Mastacembelidae, and Cobitidae, Bagridae, Siluridae, Schilbeidae, Cichlidae, and Ambassidae making to 03.03%, one species to families Ambassidae contributed to 04.88% and one genus each under Notopteridae, Aplocheilus, Heteropneustidae, Belonidae, Notopteridae, Aplocheilus, Clariidae, Heteropneustidae, Exocoetidae, Nandidae and Mugilidae contributed 01.52 each Anguillidae, Belonidae, Exocoetidae, Channidae, of total fish species. The similar studies were reported of Mastacembelidae, Nandidae and Mugilidae contributed to ichthyo faunal diversity and its significance were observed in 02.44%. The species composition of fishes belonging to secrete lake, Nath Sagar Dam, Ekrukh lake and Jawalgaon different families has revealed that 24 species belong to reservoir [32-35]. In different research studies.

Table 3: Number and percent composition of genera and species under various families

S. No Families Genera % of genera in a family Species % of species in a family 1 Notopteridae 01 2.44 01 1.52 2 Cyprinidae 12 29.27 24 36.36 3 Cobitidae 02 4.88 03 4.55 4 Aplocheilus 01 2.44 01 1.52

~ 112 ~ International Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Studies

5 Bagridae 02 4.88 06 9.09 6 Siluridae 02 4.88 02 3.03 7 Schilbeidae 02 4.88 02 3.03 8 Claridae 01 2.44 02 3.03 9 Heteropneustidae 01 2.44 01 1.52 10 Anguillidae 01 2.44 02 3.03 11 Belonidae 01 2.44 01 1.52 12 Exocoetidae 01 2.44 01 1.52 13 Channidae 01 2.44 04 6.06 14 Gobiidae 03 7.32 03 4.55 15 Mastacembelidae 01 2.44 02 3.03 16 Anabantidae 03 7.32 03 4.55 17 Nandidae 01 2.44 01 1.52 18 Cichlidae 02 4.88 04 6.06 19 Ambassidae 02 4.88 02 3.03 20 Mugilidae 01 2.44 01 1.52 Total 41 66

The number and percent composition of population status is 21.21% and the rest of the species, i.e. 11 are regarded as rare as follows; 19 species are abundant which contribute to which contribute to only 16.67% in the total fish fauna (Table. 28.79% whereas 22 species are common which contribute to 4. and Fig. 4). 33.33%, 14 species are moderate that are contributing to

Table 4: Number and Percent composition of Population Status in the total catch.

Population Status Abundant (76-100%) C = Common (51-75%) M = Moderate (26-50%) R = Rare (1-25%) Number of species 19 22 14 11 % Composition 28.79 33.33 21.21 16.67

According to IUCN (2015. 4) [37], fifty four species contributing to 81.82% are least concerned (LC), three species contributing to 4.55% are near threaten (NT), four species contributing to 6.06% are data deficient (DD), two species each contributed to 03.03% are endangered (EN) and not evaluated (NE), one species is vulnerable 1.52% (VU) in the total fish fauna (Table. 5. and Fig. 5).

~ 113 ~ International Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Studies

Table 5: Percentage occurrence of fish species in LMD under the conservation status IUCN (2015.4) and CAMP (1998)

Category EN VU NT LRnt LRlc LC A1 ac DD NE No. of species 02 01 03 - - 54 - 04 02 IUCN (2015.4) % contribution 3.03 1.52 4.55 - - 81.82 - 6.06 3.03 CAMP (1998) No. of species 03 09 - 22 01 - 01 08 22 (Conservation Assessment and Management Plan) % contribution 4.55 13.64 - 33.33 1.52 - 1.52 12.12 33.33

the occurrence of 23 species of fishes belonging to 6 orders, 18 genera of 10 families were reported in these order Cypriniformes was dominant with 13 species [36].

According to CAMP status (1998) [38], out of 66 fish species there are twenty two species of fish at Low Risk near

threatened (LR nt) and the same number of fish species are The results of the hydrophytes study revealed that the not evaluated (NE) which are contributing to 33.33% each, occurrence of forty eight weed species belong to twenty nine (13.64%) species of fish are vulnerable (VU), eight orders, thirty three families and four classes. The number of species represented as (12.12%) data deficient (DD), three classes, orders and families under three types of weeds were (04.55%) species of fish are considered as endangered (EN) shown in Table 6, 7 and 8. and one species of fish each with represented as (1.52%) are at Low Risk least concern (LRlc) and A1ac (Table. 5 and Fig. 6). The fish diversity status were studied of Talaguppa Tank,

Table 6: Checklist of free floating weeds of their scientific name, class, order, family and IUCN red list at Lower Manair Dam

S. No Name of Species Class Order Family IUCN (2015.4) 1 Azolla filiculoides Polypodiopsida Salviniales Salviniaceae NE 2 Eichornia crassipes (Mart.) Solms. Liliopsida Commelinales Pontederiaceae NE 3 Lemna perpusilla Torrey Liliopsida Arales Lemnaceae LC 4 Ottelia alismoides (L.) Pers. Liliopsida Hydrocharitales Hydrocharitaceae LC 5 Pistia stratiotes L. Liliopsida Arales Araceae LC

Table 7: Checklist of Submerged weeds of their scientific name, class, order, family and IUCN red list at Lower Manair Dam

S. No Name of Species Class Order Family IUCN 2015.4 1 Aponogeton natans L.f Liliopsida Najadales Aponogetonaceae LC 2 Chara globularis J. L.T Charophyceae Charales Characeae NE 3 Ceratophyllum demersum L. Magnoliopsida Nymphaeales Ceratophyllaceae LC 4 Hydrilla verticillata (L. f.) Royle Liliopsida Hydrocharitales Hydrocharitaceae LC 5 Ipomoea aquatica Forsk (Rooted) Magnoliopsida Solanales Convolvulaceae LC 6 Ipomoea carnea jacq Magnoliopsida Solanales Convolvulaceae NE 7 Marsilea quadrifolia Polypodiopsida Salviniales Marsileaceae LC 8 Najas minor L. Liliopsida Hydrocharitales Hydrocharitaceae LC 9 Potamogeton pectinatus L. Liliopsida Najadales Potamogetonaceae LC 10 Vallisneria spiralis L. Liliopsida Hydrocharitales Hydrocharitaceae LC

Table 8: Checklist of emergent weeds of their scientific name, class, order, family and IUCN red list at Lower Manair Dam

S. No Name of Species Class Order Family IUCN 2015.4 1 Alternanthera sessilis (L.)R. Br. ex Magnoliopsida Caryophyllales Amaranthaceae LC 2 Alternanthera philoxeroides Magnoliopsida Caryophyllales Amaranthaceae LC 3 Ammannia baccifera L. Magnoliopsida Myrtales Lythraceae LC 4 Aeschynomene indica L. Magnoliopsida Fabales Fabaceae LC 5 Bacopa monnieri (L.) Wettestin Magnoliopsida Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae LC 6 Coix aquatica Roxb. Liliopsida Poales Poaceae NE 7 Commelina benghalensis L. Liliopsida Commelinales Commelinaceae LC 8 Commelina hasskarlii C. Comm. Cyrt. Liliopsida Commelinales Commelinaceae LC

~ 114 ~ International Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Studies

9 Cyperus rotundus L. Liliopsida Cyperales Cyperaceae LC 10 Cyperus difformis L Liliopsida Cyperales Cyperaceae LC 11 Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. Liliopsida Poales Poaceae LC 12 Cyathocline purpurea (Buch-Ham. ex D. Don) Oktze Magnoliopsida Asterales Asteraceae LC 13 Chrozophora rottleri (Geisel.) A. Juss. ex. Spr Magnoliopsida Malpighiales Euphorbiaceae NE 14 Dopatrium junceum (Roxb.) Buch- Hum ex Benth. Magnoliopsida Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae LC 15 Eclipta alba Magnoliopsida Asterales Asteraceae LC 16 Eleocharis geniculata (L.) R&S. Liliopsida Cyperales Cyperaceae LC 17 Eleocharis capitata R. Br. Liliopsida Cyperales Cyperaceae LC 18 Eriocaulon cinereum R.Br. Liliopsida Poales Eriocaulaceae NE 19 Echinochloa colona (L.) Link Liliopsida Poales Poaceae LC 20 Fimbristylis miliacea Liliopsida Cyperales Cyperaceae LC 21 Gomphrena celosioides Mart. Magnoliopsida Caryophyllales Amaranthaceae NE 22 Glinus lotoides L. Magnoliopsida Caryophyllales Molluginaceae NE 23 Gnaphalium pulvinatum Del. Magnoliopsida Asterales Asteraceae NE 24 Grangea maderaspatana Magnoliopsida Asterales Asteraceae LC 25 Heliotropium supinum L. Magnoliopsida Boraginales Boraginaceae LC 26 Limnophila sessiliflora L. Magnoliopsida Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae LC 27 Polygonum glabrum Willd. Magnoliopsida Polygonales Polygonaceae NE 28 Phyla nodiflora (L.) Greene Magnoliopsida Lamiales Verbenaceae LC 29 Rotala serpyllifolia (Roth.) Bremeck Magnoliopsida Myrtales Lythraceae LC 30 Sesbania bispinosa (Jacq.) w. t. wight Magnoliopsida Fabales Fabaceae LC 31 Sopubia delphinifolia (L.) G. Don Magnoliopsida Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae VU 32 Sphaeranthus indicus L. Magnoliopsida Asterales Asteraceae LC 33 Typha angustata Bory and Chaub. Liliopsida Typhales Typhaceae NE

The free floating and emergent weeds contributed each with Table 9: Number of classes, orders, families and species of two classes but submerged weeds more contributed to four Macrophytes at lower Manair Dam classes in LMD. Recorded aquatic weeds under twenty orders, Free the emergent weeds occupied highest number i.e., 13 species, Total Submerged Emergent Classification floating followed by submerged weeds (06) and free floating weeds species weeds weeds (04). In 26 families, the emergent weeds occupied more in weeds Class 4 2 4 2 number as 15, followed by submerged weeds (06) and free Order 20 4 6 13 floating weeds (05). Emergent weeds were dominant with 33 Family 26 5 6 15 species which contributed 68.75% of the total species (48) Species 48 5 10 33 followed by submerged weeds with 10 (20.83%) and free floating weeds with 05 (10.42%) (Table. 9 and Fig. 7)

The number and percent composition of free floating, to five species (50%), followed by Magnoliopsida represented submerged and emergent weeds under four classes (Table:10, as three species (30%), Polypodiopsida and Charophyceae Fig: 8), Liliopsida was dominant with four species which represented each with one species respectively (10%). The contributed to 80% of the total five species, followed by recorded 33 species of emergent weeds in which Polypodiopsida was one species which contributed to 20% of Magnoliopsida contributed to 21 (63.64%) species whereas the total free floating aquatic weeds. From the recorded Liliopsida contributed to 12 species (36.37%) in the Lower submerged weeds out of ten species, Liliopsida contributing Manair Dam.

~ 115 ~ International Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Studies

Table 10: The number and percent contribution of Macrophytes in Four classes

Free floating Submerged weeds Emergent weeds Class (4) Total No. % contribution Total No. % contribution Total No. % contribution Liliopsida 4 80.00 5 50.00 12 36.37 Polypodiopsida 1 20.00 1 10.00 0 0 Charophyceae 0 0 1 10.00 0 0 Magnoliopsida 0 0 3 30.00 21 63.64

are not evaluated (NE), 1 species is vulnerable (VU). The least concerned of free floating weeds contributed three species (6.25%) and two (4.17%) species are not evaluated. The submerged weeds eight species (16.67%) are least concerned and two (4.17%) species are not evaluated. In the case of emergent weeds, 24 species (50%) are least concerned and eight (16.67%) are not evaluated; one (2.03%) is vulnerable. (Table: 11 and Fig: 9). In the similar studies an assessment of macrophyte biodiversity of a freshwater reservoir of Bhadrawati, the classified macrophytes checklist and status of plant species were reported but the percent composition of aquatic weeds represented in the Kaduna State [39, 40]. of Nigeria are completely vary A total of 48 species of hydrophytes belong to 4 classes, 20 orders and 26 families, according to IUCN (2015. 4) [37]. Of these, 35 species aquatic weeds are least concerned (LC), 12

Table 11: Number and Percentage contribution of Aquatic weeds to their IUCN Read list (2015.4).

Free floating Submerged weeds Emergent weeds IUCN (2013.2) Total No. % contribution Total No. % contribution Total No. % contribution LC 03 6.25 08 16.67 24 50.00 NE 02 4.17 02 4.17 08 16.67 VU 0 0 0 0 01 2.03

water and <1.00 indicates heavily polluted water [41]. These results indicated that good diversity index is found out in the Lower Manair Dam (Fig. 10). The richness of fish species was highest (56) in December 2014 and lowest (36) in January 2015 (Fig: 11). Four rivers of Sharavati, Aghanashini, Bedti and Kali, of the central were studied for their fish diversity and composition a total species richness of 92 species were reported [42]. The present results indicated that the maximum diversity possible ln (S) ranged from 2.37 (Apr- 15) to 4.03 (Dec-14) (Fig: 12) is found out in Lower Manair Dam. The fish species diversity evenness (E) is found as lowest value 0.58 (Dec-14) and highest value 0.88 (Sep-15) in Shannon-Wiener diversity indices of fish species in Lower Lower Manair Dam (Fig: 13). It is clearly evident that there is Manair Dam is found variation from 2.24 to 3.31 results given evenly distribution of the fish fauna in Lower Manair Dam. in Table-12. The highest diversity was recorded in September The species diversity value 1.67 indicates a highly complex 2015, earlier reports were noted in June 2011, while the community, for a greater variety of species allows for a lager lowest in February 2015, earlier reports were indicated in array of species interactions at Owabi Dam Reservoir in January 2011 [23, 24]. Shannon index (H-) values are ranged Ghana [43, 44]. from >3 indicates clean water 1.00 to 3.00 indicates moderate

Table 12: Fish Population Diversity Index

Fish Population / Nov Dec Jan- Feb Mar April May Jun- Jul Aug Sep Oct Monthly 2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 Species richness 53 56 36 37 39 41 38 44 43 39 43 43 H 2.73 2.34 2.47 2.24 2.43 2.37 2.29 2.91 2.49 2.75 3.31 2.27 Maximum diversity 3.97 4.03 3.58 3.61 3.66 2.37 3.64 3.78 3.76 3.66 3.76 3.76 possible ln(S) Evenness E 0.69 0.58 0.69 0.68 0.66 0.64 0.63 0.77 0.66 0.75 0.88 0.60

~ 116 ~ International Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Studies

of Shannon-Weiner, Evenness and richness are fairly significant in during study period and the diversity of fish fauna is more in Lower Manair Dam. The present investigation strongly recommends that there should be some conservation steps to be taken to stop illegal fishing, crucial breeding habitats and creating mass awareness are compulsory to be saved to protect fish faunal bio diversity. Reservoir authorities should take necessary steps to minimize the human activities in and around the reservoir and they have to regularly check the physicochemical and biological parameters to prevent any duplication on reservoir ecology.

5. Acknowledgements The author would like to thank University Grant Commission for rendering financial assistance and Commissioner Collegiate Education Telangana, Govt. Degree College, Jammikunta, for providing necessary facilities.

6. References 1. Major Water Resources Development Projects in the Godavari Basin Lower Manair Reservoir. Hydrology and Water Resources Information System for India. 2. Jairam KC. The freshwater fishes of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Burma and Sri Lanka- A Handbook. Zoological Survey of India, Culcutta, 1981, 475. 3. Ehrlich PR, Wilson EO. Biodiversity studies science and policy. Science 253; 758-762. 4. Pandey K, Shukla JP. Fish & Fisheries II edition 2007, 328-329. 5. Kumar Varun, Kumar Kamad. Icthyofaunal Diversity of Dhaura Reservoir, Kichha, Uttarakhand, India. Research Journal of Animal, Veterinary and Fishery Sciences. 2003; 1(5):1-4. 6. Menon AGK. Check list - freshwater fishes of India, Records of the Zoological Survey of India, Occasional: 1999, 175: 366.

7. Majid FZ. Aquatic Weeds –Utility and Development, Fig 12: Maximum Diversity Possible In(S) Agro Botanical Publishers, India, 1986. 8. Wetzel RG. Limnology, W.B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia, 1975, 743. 9. Meshram C B. Macro invertebrate fauna of lake Wadali, Amaravati, . J Aqua. Biol. 2003; 18(2):47- 50. 10. Ambasht RS. Macrophytes limnology in the Indian subcontinent. Ukaaz Publication, : 2005, 58- 174. 11. Raut Nayana S, Pejaver Madhuri. Survey of diversity of plankton attached to macrophytes from weed infested lakes. J Aqua. Biol. 2005; 20(1):1-7. 12. Hamilton- Buchanan, F. An account of the fishes of river

Ganges and its branches. Edinburgh and London 1822; 7: Fig 13: Evenness (E) 450. 13. Mishra S. An aid to the identification of the common 4. Conclusion commercial fishes of India and Pakistan Rec. Ind. 1. Present study revealed that sixty six fish species found out Mus., 1962; 57:1-320. including five exotic species in the Lower Manair Dam. 14. Munro ISR. The Marine and Freshwater Fishes of Among them—22 species are common, 19 are abundant, 14 Ceylon. Biotech Books, Delhi, 2000. are moderate and 11 are rare species in the reservoir. A 15. Day F. The fishes of India, being a natural history of the number of macrophyte species are available in Lower Manair fishes known to inhabit the seas and freshwater of India, Dam at monsoon period and post monsoon season. Free Burma and Ceylon, text and atlas, London William floating and submerged species are more dominant in all Dawson and Sons Ltd., 1958; 195-198. seasons. Emergent weed species are dominant in the winter 16. Day F. The fauna of British India including Ceylon and season only. From the recorded forty eight species of Burma, The London, Taylor and Francis Fishes 1889; hydrophytes, 35 are least concerned, 12 are not evaluated and 1(548):2-509. one species is vulnerable in the reservoir. The biotic indices ~ 117 ~ International Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Studies

17. Jairam KC. The proper generic names for some common 37. IUCN Red List of threatened species, version 2015, 4. Indian fishes of commercial importance. J Zoo. Soc. www.iucnredlist.org down loaded on December 2015. India 1961; 12(2):239-242. 38. CAMP. Conservation and Management Plan for 18. Jairam KC. The freshwater fishes of India, Pakistan, Freshwater Fishes of India. Organized by Zoo Outreach Bangladesh, Burma and Sri Lanka- A Handbook. Organisation, NBFGR, Lucknow, 1998. Zoological Survey of India, Culcutta, 1981; 475. 39. Shashikant R. Sitre. Assessment of Macrophyte Bio- 19. Jayaram KC. The Freshwater Fishes of Indian Region Diversity of a Freshwater Reservoir of Bhadrawati Tehsil Narendra Publication House, New Delhi, 2nd Edition, in . Online International 2011. Interdisciplinary Research Journal, {Bi-Monthly} 20. Talwar PK, Jhingran AG. Inland fishes of India and ISSN2249-9598. 2013, 3(3). Adjacent Countries, Balkemra, Rotterdam, 1991, A. 40. Kayode J, Ogunleye OT. Checklist and Status of Plant 21. Nelson, Fishes of the World. 3rd Edn. John Wiley and Species Used as Spices in Kaduna State of Nigeria. Sons, New York, 1976, 416. African Journal of General Agriculture. 2008; 4:13-18. 22. Cook CDK. Aquatic and wetland plants in India Oxford 41. Wilhm JL, Doris TC. Species diversity of benthic University press, Londo, 1996. macroinvertebrates in a stream receiving domestic and oil 23. Thirupathaiah M, Samatha Ch, Sammaiah Ch. Diversity refinery effluents. Amer. Midl. Nat. 1996; 76:427-449. of fish fauna in lower Manair reservoir of Karimnagar 42. Anuradha Bhata. Diversity and composition of freshwater district (A.P.) India Pelagia Research Library Advances fishes in river systems of Central Western Ghats, India. in Applied Science Research 2013; 4(2):203-211. Environmental Biology of Fishes 2003; 68:25-38. 24. Rama Rao K. Ichthyo faunal bio diversity in the lower 43. Shinde SE, Pathan TS, Raut KS, Bhandare RY, Manair Dam at Karimnagar district; Telangana State: Sonawane DI. Fish Diversity of at Pravara India. Pelagia Research Library; Advances in Applied Sangam District , (M.S.) India, World Science Research, ISSN: 0976-8610, CODEN (USA): Journal of Zoology. 2009; 4(3):176-179. AASRFC, 2014; 5(5):237-248. 44. Nunoo JN, Agbo M. Ackah. Fish fauna of the Owabi 25. Biju Kumar. Exotic fishes and Freshwater fish diversity. Dam Reservoir in Ghana Proceedings of the International Zoos Print Journal. 2000; XV (11): RNI 2, 2. Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences 2012; 26. Rama Rao K. Diversity of Ornamental Fishes in Lower 2(1):21-26. Manair Dam at Karimnagar Dt. . IOSR Journal of Pharmacy and Biological Sciences (IOSR- JPBS). e-ISSN: 2014; 2278-3008, p-ISSN: 2319- 7676. 9(1):Ver 1, 20-24. 27. Rama Rao K. A study on larvivorous fish species efficacy of lower Manair dam at Karimnagar, Andhra Pradesh, India. Pelagia Research Library. Advances in Applied Science Research. 2014; 5(2):133-143. 28. Sakhare VB, Joshi PK. Present status of reservoir fishery in Maharashtra. Fishing Chimes 2004; 24(8):56-60. 29. Pisca Ravi Shankar, Saraladevi B, Divakara Chary K. The present status of Ibrahimbagh, a minor reservoir of Hyderabad, Fishing Chimes 2000; 20(2):41-43. 30. Sugunan VV, Yadava YS. Hirakhud reservoir strategies for fisheries development. Bulletin CIFRI, Barrackpore, India 1992, 66. 31. Sandeep R, Rathod, Gulab D, Khedkar. Impact of elevation, latitude and longitude on fish diversity in Godavari River Journal of Research in Biology. 2011; JRB 1(4):269-275. 32. Krishna SM, Ravi Shankar Piska. Ichithgofaunal biodiversity in secret lake Durgamcheruvu, Ranga Reddy Dist., Andhra Pradesh, India, J Aqua. Bio. 2006; 21(1):77-79. 33. Hiware CJ, Pawar RT. Ichthyofauna of Paithan Reservoir (Nath Sagar Dam) in Aurangabad Dist. Of region Maharashtra, Ecology and Environment, APH Publishing Corporation, New Delhi, 2006. 34. Battul PN, Rao KR, Navale RA, Bagale MD, Shah NV. Fish diversity from Ekrukh Lake near Solapur, Maharashtra, J. of Aquatic Biology. 2007; 22(2). 35. Jayabhaye UM, Khedkar GD. Fish diversity of Sawana dam in Hingoli dist. of Maharashtra, J Aqua. Biol. 2008; 23(1):26-28. 36. Mookappa Naik CK, Hina Kousar. Study on Fish Diversity Status of Talaguppa Tank, Sagara Taluk, . The Ecosca 2012; 6(3, 4):149-151.

~ 118 ~