Aspects of the Biological Integrity of the Mutale, Mutshindudi and Tshinane Rivers, Limpopo Province
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
COPYRIGHT AND CITATION CONSIDERATIONS FOR THIS THESIS/ DISSERTATION o Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. o NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes. o ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original. How to cite this thesis Surname, Initial(s). (2012) Title of the thesis or dissertation. PhD. (Chemistry)/ M.Sc. (Physics)/ M.A. (Philosophy)/M.Com. (Finance) etc. [Unpublished]: University of Johannesburg. Retrieved from: https://ujdigispace.uj.ac.za (Accessed: Date). Aspects of the biological integrity of the Mutale, Mutshindudi and Tshinane Rivers, Limpopo Province By ALBERTUS JACOBUS FOURIE Minor Dissertation Submitted in fulfilment of the requirement for the degree of MAGISTER SCIENTIAE In AQUATIC HEALTH In the FACULTY OF SCIENCE At the UNIVERSITY OF JOHANNESBURG Supervisor: Dr J.C. van Dyk May 2014 A.J. Fourie Page 1 Abstract Aquatic ecosystems in rural South Africa have been impacted over many years by commercial and subsistence anthropogenic activities (DWAF, 2001). These impacts include commercial and subsistence farming, domestic use (e.g. washing of clothes, cars and bathing) and recreational use (e.g. fishing). In the northern parts of the Limpopo Province of South Africa (Vhembe District) the land use is primarily dominated by various agricultural activities and human settlements. Rivers in this region flow through mixed agricultural use, including commercial agriculture (tea and timber plantations) as well as subsistence farming and housing. Perennial rivers in this region include the Mutale, Mutshindudi and Tshinane rivers. These rivers are located in the Water Management Area 2 (WMA 2 Luvuvhu-Letaba) (Kleynhans, et al., 2007a). They are highland river systems, originating in the nearby Soutpansberg Mountain, and these rivers all form part of the larger drainage system of the Luvuvhu River, a tributary of the Limpopo River. The wetlands in the catchment of these rivers are also heavily utilised by the local communities (Working on Wetlands, 2013) used for grazing, sand mining and subsistence cultivation, thus providing a livelihood for the surrounding communities (SANBI, 2012). The aim of the study was to assess aspects of the biological integrity of the Mutale, Mutshindudi and Tshinane rivers. This study formed part of a larger study that included assessments of both abiotic and biotic aspects of these river systems. For this study, the focus was on assessing the fish community structure through the application of Fish Response Assessment Index (FRAI), riparian vegetation through the application of Vegetation Response Assessment Index (VEGRAI) and fish health aspects with special reference to liver and gonadal histopathology. Water quality parameters were found to be within the target water quality range for aquatic ecosystems. The results did however vary between upstream and downstream sampling sites. Similarly, compared to upstream sites, the FRAI showed the Mutale River to improve in fish community structure whereas the Tshinane and Mutshindudi rivers showed a decrease in the FRAI score. The VEGRAI results showed a decrease in EcoCondition in the Mutale and Mutshindudi rivers whereas the Tshinane indicated an increase. This can be attributed to land use change up to the edge of the river systems. Visual observation at the various study sites showed a definite localised impact of human activities on the beds and banks of many parts of the rivers. No histological alterations were identified in any of the gonadal or liver tissue of the Chiloglanis pretoriae (Shortspine suckermouth) (Van der Horst, 1931) and the fish were found to be in a healthy condition according to the selected A.J. Fourie Page 2 parameters (gonads and livers) assessed. The fish community structure of the three rivers were found to be in a moderately to largely modified condition according to the ecological state categories calculated. However, the fish health assessment showed no histological alterations in the sampled fish. It is proposed that future studies investigate the influence of the domestic use of the rivers as well as attempt to quantify the impact of agriculture on the system. A.J. Fourie Page 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................. 12 1.1. Research Aim and Objectives ............................................................................... 16 1.2. Hypothesis ............................................................................................................ 16 2. Chapter 2: Background information .......................................................................... 17 2.1. Land use ............................................................................................................... 17 2.2. Agricultural impacts ............................................................................................... 19 2.2.1. Agrochemicals including pesticides .............................................................. 19 2.2.2. Sedimentation .............................................................................................. 19 2.2.3. Alteration of the beds and banks of rivers ..................................................... 20 2.2.4. Afforestation ................................................................................................. 21 2.2.5. Buffers and agriculture ................................................................................. 21 2.3. Domestic use of water ........................................................................................... 22 2.3.1. Pathogen pollution in the study sites river systems....................................... 22 2.3.2. Fishing for human consumption.................................................................... 23 2.4. Study area description ........................................................................................... 23 2.4.1. Ecoregions ................................................................................................... 24 2.4.2. Vegetation types .......................................................................................... 26 2.5. Selected study sites .............................................................................................. 27 2.6. Mutale River .......................................................................................................... 28 2.6.1. Mutale River sampling site description ......................................................... 29 2.7. Mutshindudi River .................................................................................................. 31 2.7.1. Mutshindudi river sampling site description .................................................. 31 2.8. Tshinane River ...................................................................................................... 33 2.8.1. Tshinane River sampling site description ..................................................... 33 3. Chapter 3: Methods .................................................................................................. 35 3.1. Fish population response assessment ................................................................... 35 3.1.1. Step 1: Selection of river for assessment ..................................................... 36 3.1.2. Step 2: Determination of the reference fish assemblage .............................. 36 A.J. Fourie Page 4 3.1.3. Step 3: Determination of the present state of drivers .................................... 37 3.1.4. Step 4: Selection of representative sampling sites ....................................... 38 3.1.5. Step 5: Determination of fish habitat condition .............................................. 38 3.1.6. Step 6: Fish sampling ................................................................................... 38 3.1.7. Step 7: Collate and analyse fish sampling data ............................................ 39 3.1.8. Step 8: Execution of FRAI model .................................................................. 39 3.2. Fish health assessment ......................................................................................... 40 3.2.1. Target species .............................................................................................. 40 3.2.2. Necropsy ...................................................................................................... 40 3.2.3. Histopathology ............................................................................................. 41 3.3. Marginal to terrestrial vegetation assessment ........................................................ 41 4. Chapter 4: Results .................................................................................................... 43 4.1. Ecological drivers .................................................................................................. 43 4.1.1. Turbidity or Total Suspended Solids ............................................................. 44 4.1.2. Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) ............................................................... 44 4.1.3. Nitrates and phosphates .............................................................................. 46 4.1.4. pH ...............................................................................................................