Preliminary Checklists for Applying Sercon (System for Evaluating Rivers for Conservation) to Rivers in Serbia

Arch. Biol. Sci., Belgrade, 64 (3), 1037-1056, 2012 DOI:10.2298/ABS1203037R

PRELIMINARY CHECKLISTS FOR APPLYING SERCON (SYSTEM FOR EVALUATING RIVERS FOR CONSERVATION) TO RIVERS IN SERBIA

SNEŽANA RADULOVIĆ1, P. J BOON2, DUŠANKA LAKETIĆ1, P. SIMONOVIĆ3, S. PUZOVIĆ4, MILICA ŽIVKOVIĆ1, TAMARA JURCA5, M. OVUKA6, S. MALAGUTI7 and IVANA TEODOROVIĆ1

1 University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Sciences, Department of Biology and Ecology, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia 2 Scottish Natural Heritage, Policy and Advice Directorate, Silvan House, Edinburgh, EH12 7AT, United Kingdom 3 University of Belgrade, Faculty of Biology, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia 4 Provincial Secretariat for Urban Planning, Construction and Environmental Protection, APV, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia 5 Freshwater Ecology Group, Zoology Department, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Dublin, Ireland 6 University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Sciences, Department of Mathematics and Informatics, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia 7 University of Ferrera, Faculty of Applied Ecology, 44121 Ferrara, Italy

Abstract - This paper describes the first steps in gathering biological data to assess the conservation value of rivers in Serbia, using SERCON (System for Evaluating Rivers for Conservation). SERCON was developed in the UK to improve consistency in assessments of river ‘quality’ by using a scoring system to evaluate habitat features and species groups, catchment characteristics, and the potential impacts to which river systems may be subjected. This paper provides checklists for aquatic, semi- aquatic and marginal plants, macroinvertebrates, fish and birds associated with rivers in Serbia, collated from a wide range of published and unpublished sources. These lists should be regarded as provisional because few wide-ranging biological surveys have been carried out specifically on Serbian rivers; further revisions are likely as more information becomes available in future. Ultimately, the work will benefit regulators and decision-makers with responsibility for river management under the new Water Law, and contribute to river protection and conservation in Serbia.

Key words: SERCON, river quality, checklists, plants, macroinvertebrates, fish, birds, Serbia

INTRODUCTION such a process becomes effectively unworkable if values are left undefined. Unless an evaluation pro- There are many reasons for assessing the nature cedure can be used that is rigorous and repeatable, conservation value of rivers, such as assisting with it is also extremely difficult both to describe the the production of catchment management plans, value of rivers in anything other than vague terms, contributing to the process of environmental im- and to compare the relative merits of different riv- pact assessment, targeting appropriate rivers for ers (Boon et al., 1997). rehabilitation, or selecting important areas for protection. One of the fundamental problems with this The broad concept of ‘conservation value’ may approach is the inherent subjectivity of many of the be understood in a variety of ways. Even though criteria. While it is recognized that subjectivity will these are not mutually exclusive, the factors which always be an element of conservation evaluation, contribute to ‘value’ in each case are often not close-

1037 1038 SNEŽANA RADULOVIĆ ET AL. ly related, so it is inappropriate to attempt to pro- The geographical focus in SERCON is the river duce some total assessment of ‘conservation quality’. channel, river banks, riparian zone, and the flood- SERCON (System for Evaluating Rivers for Con- plain, but with the evaluation also taking account of servation, Boon et al., 1997) is concerned only with broader catchment characteristics. The primary out- nature conservation value and its assessment. This put from SERCON is a suite of conservation indices paper marks the start of a process for gathering data (from 0-100), one for each of the six main criteria, to apply SERCON to rivers in Serbia. and an impact index, derived from information on each attribute. A seventh unscored category (Ad- MATERIALS AND METHODS ditional Features of Importance) allows the user to draw attention to unique or unusual features of the Background to SERCON river. Each evaluation is restricted to a river reach known as an ‘ECS’ – an abbreviation in SERCON 2 The prime motivation for developing a new tech- for ‘Evaluated Corridor Section’. nique for river conservation assessment was two- fold: a perceived need to increase the breadth, rigor Further background on the rationale, develop- and repeatability of evaluations, and shifting the fo- ment, and revision of SERCON can be found in Boon cus from merely seeking ways of protecting the best (2000, 2004), Boon and Howell (1997), and Boon et to managing, improving and restoring river resourc- al. (1997, 1998, 2002) and Wilkinson et al. (1998). es across the full spectrum of conservation value (Boon et al., 2009). Moreover, with the demands of Practical applications the Water Framework Directive, the need for new river monitoring programs, and a growing interest in One of the principal objectives of SERCON was to river restoration, relevant tools for evaluating river widen the scope of river conservation evaluation from ‘quality’ are very much in demand. a narrow focus (on aquatic plants or rare species, for example) to the full spectrum of conservation value. Work on SERCON (System for Evaluating Riv- However, there are occasions where scientific data ers for Conservation) began in the early 1990s, led are limited when it may not be possible, or even de- by SNH in partnership with the statutory conserva- sirable, to allocate resources for a full SERCON eval- tion and environment agencies in the UK (Boon et uation In response to the need for a ‘slimmer’ version al., 1997). A re-design of the system to create SER- of SERCON, a series of ‘SERCON Applications’ was CON 2 (Boon et al., 2002) introduced several sig- developed, each allowing flexibility to ‘pick and mix’ nificant changes, although the general principles SERCON attributes for specific purposes. and structure remain the same – essentially a tech- nique for scoring a wide range of habitat features Seven applications have been designed: and species groups, catchment characteristics, and the potential impacts to which river systems may be • Scoping/Context Setting subjected. Information on each attribute is used to create a picture of a river in terms of accepted con- • River Rehabilitation servation criteria such as Naturalness, Representa- tiveness, and Rarity. A separate part of the system • Environmental Impact Assessment records other background data (altitude, catchment land-use, phosphorus levels) helping to place each • ‘Site’ Assessment (Short River Stretches) nature conservation assessment in a geographical, geological and water quality context. The list of the • Reporting Special Natural Characteristics attributes and criteria evaluated in SERCON 2 is given in Boon et al. (2002). • Assessment of Aspects of the Flora or Fauna PRELIMINARY CHECKLISTS FOR APPLYING SERCON TO RIVERS IN SERBIA 1039

• Monitoring for different purposes. As aquatic plants are generally considered to be sensitive to physical alteration in This helps to make SERCON more relevant to streams, being in close contact with the environmen- particular user groups, such as conservation agencies tal conditions of rivers through the root-system, they or environmental consultants. are frequently used to establish the ecological quality of aquatic ecosystems (O’Hare et al., 2010; Radulović To operate SERCON, the user needs to obtain et al., 2010). and collate a range of physical, chemical and biological data. Standard checklists of plants and ani- However, one of the main problems when record- mals associated with rivers are an essential part of ing freshwater plants is how to define them. Preston SERCON in order to ensure consistency. However, and Croft (1997) pointed out that the boundaries of because SERCON was originally developed for use fresh waters are blurred and that many plant species in the UK, those carrying out evaluations elsewhere are well adapted to boundary zones liable to fluctuation need to refer to checklists specific to their own in water level. They recognized as freshwater aquatic countries, or preferably to individual ecoregions. plants those species they regarded as characteristically Hence, the aim of this study was to provide check- growing with at least their basal parts permanently in lists for aquatic, semi-aquatic and marginal plants, water throughout the year. This criterion, however, aquatic macroinvertebrates, fish and birds, associ- still leaves space for misinterpretation. As such, the ated with rivers in Serbia that can be used in the difficulties in defining aquatic and semi-aquatic plants recently developed SERCON software at the Faculty have led to different recorders adopting differing views of Science, University of Novi Sad. These checklists on what constitutes ‘aquatic plants’. This emphasizes should be regarded as provisional and subject to the need to use a standard, published checklist, the further refinement. In general, few surveys have absence of which has been a major drawback of most been carried out on the biota of Serbian rivers, freshwater vegetation surveys in the past. apart from those that collect data on freshwater invertebrates for routine water quality monitoring. The list of aquatic and marginal plants given It is intended that future work, specific to running in this study (Table 1) comprises 237 taxa, derived waters, will help in revising the lists – for example, from published data (Slavnić, 1940, 1956; Janković, by adding species that were hitherto unrecorded, or 1953; Danon and Blaženčić, 1965; Horvat et al., 1974; by removing species subsequently found to be as- Butorac and Crnčević, 1987; Ranđelović, 1988, 2002; sociated mainly with other types of habitat rather Stojanović et al., 1994; Vučković et al., 1997, 1999; than rivers. Stevanović et al., 1995, 2003, 2004; Radulović, 2000, 2005; Radulović et al., 2004, 2010, 2011; Vučković RESULTS AND DISCUSSION and Panjković 1999; Lazić, 2006; Vukov, 2003, 2008; Panjković, 2005; Blaženčić et al., 2006; Šinžar-Sekulić Aquatic and marginal plant checklist et al., 2006; Veljić, 2006; Topuzović et al., 2009).

There is a growing need to catalogue riverine, ditch, The list corresponds with the National EUNIS lake and pond organisms, to assess their wildlife value classification (Lakušić et al., 2005), containing all and to understand the impact of management on their aquatic macrophytes as well as all semi-aquatic and conservation in the face of advancing threats such marginal species, including their conservation status as water pollution and river engineering. For rivers, according to Stevanović (1999), IUCN (2011) and this usually involves recording plants along transects, SGRS (2010a). while for standing waters it is usually combined with walkover and grapnel sampling (Rodwell, 1995), where The commonest aquatic species occur in meso- aquatic, emergent and bankside plants may be sampled eutrophic waters, typical for the Danube catchment, 1040 SNEŽANA RADULOVIĆ ET AL. especially for habitats where sediments have accu- It is important to recognize that the lists in Tables mulated: Lemna minor, Spirodela polyrhiza, Salvinia 2-4 represent merely the first attempt to collate most natans, Lemna trisulca, Nymphoides peltata, Hydro- of the families in the Serbian freshwater invertebrate charis morsus-ranae, Nymphaea alba, Nuphar lutea, fauna for the purposes of assessing the conservation Ceratophyllum demersum, Myriophyllum spicatum, status of rivers and streams. Assessments of inver- Rorippa amphibia, Phragmites australis, Typha latifo- tebrate naturalness in SERCON are made using the lia, Typha angustifolia, Limosella aquatica, Polygon- River Invertebrate Prediction System (RIVPACS) um mite, Agrostis stolonifera, Riccia crystallina, Eleo- (Armitage et al., 1983; Clarke et al., 1994). RIVPACS charis acicularis, Polygonum lapathifolium and Cype- provides site-specific predictions of the macroinver- rus michelianus, comprising all four of the principal tebrate fauna expected based on environmental fea- community types: surface and subsurface duckweed, tures in the absence of major environmental stress free-floating or rooted submerged pondweed, rooted (Wright et al., 1997; Wright et al., 1998b). In the ab- water-lily vegetation with floating leaves, and emer- sence of a RIVPACS-type system in Serbia, it would gent reed vegetation (Radulović et al., 2010, 2011) be necessary to define the composition of the macroinvertebrate community at reference condition for The invertebrate checklist each river or river type.

The list of macroinvertebrates for potentially assess- The Fish checklist ing the conservation status of rivers and streams in the Republic of Serbia is based on the results of the The list of species (Table 5) of finned fish and lampreys following studies: Živić et al., 2002; 2005; Paunović et was compiled for rivers in Serbia, within the catch- al., 2006, 2007; Djikanović et al., 2008; Djuknić et al., ment areas of the Black, Adriatic and Aegean seas. 2010; Atanacković et al., 2011; Marković et al., 2011. The list was created using data given in Simonović The list contains 106 families classified into Orders and Nikolić (1996) and Simonović (2001), supple- and higher taxonomic groups (Table 2). An addition- mented with records on new discoveries of lamprey al list of endangered freshwater invertebrate species, and fish species reported for the territory of the Re- based on SGRS(2010a), is given in Table 3. public of Serbia (Hegediš et al. 1991; Sekulić et al. 1998, 1999; Simonović and Nikolić 1996; Simonović The list of the non-native species in Table 4 is de- 1999; Simonović and Marić 2006; Simonović et al. rived from studies by Tomović et al. (2010), Jakovčev- 1998, 2006a, 2006b, 2007, 2010a and 2010b; Cakić Todorović et al. (2010) and Zorić et al. (2011). et al. 2000, 2004; Cvijanović et al. 2005; Šipoš et al. 2004; Lenhardt et al. 2006, 2011; Marić et al. 2004, The wide diversity of the freshwater macroinver- 2006, 2011 ). The nomenclature of fish and lamprey tebrate fauna poses a serious challenge in establish- species relies on the phylogenetic species concept ing standard lists of species, especially if there are (Kottelat and Freihof, 2007) supplanting the previ- no national checklists or they need to be updated. ous nomenclature which followed the biological spe- Owing to the scarcity of information on the ben- cies concept, with sub-species specific for particular thic macroinvertebrate fauna in Serbia, family level river drainages. The largest rate of sub-endemism rather than species level has been used in environ- occurs in the Adriatic Sea catchment (Beli Drim mental assessment, despite the potential limitations and Plav Rivers) in the southwestern part of Serbia, of taxonomic resolution. In SERCON, both family- followed by those in the Aegean Sea (Lepenac and and species-level data may be used in conservation Dragovištica Rivers) and the Black Sea catchments assessment. Moreover, Wright et al. (1998a) demon- (the Danube River). strated that both family richness and BMWP family richness are good surrogates for macroinvertebrate The list encompasses both native and non-native species richness. species, with translocations of native species occur- PRELIMINARY CHECKLISTS FOR APPLYING SERCON TO RIVERS IN SERBIA 1041

Table 1. The aquatic, semi-aquatic and marginal plant species check-list Species Conservation status Acorus calamus L.* IUCN-LC, NCS-P Agrostis canina L. Agrostis stolonifera L. Alisma gramineum Lej. NCS-SP Alisma plantago-aquatica L. IUCN-LC Alnus glutinosa (L.) Gaertner Alnus incana (L.) Moench subsp. incana Amorpha fruticosa L. * Angelica sylvestris L. Apium nodiflorium (L.) Lag. Azolla filiculoides Lam. * Beckmannia eruciformis (L.) Host subsp. eruciformis NCS-P Berula erecta (Hudson) Coville Bidens cernua L. Bidens tripartita L. Butomus umbellatus L. Calamagrostis pseudophragmites (Haller fil.) Koeler Calliergon cordifolium (Hedw.) Kindb Callitriche palustris L. NCS-SP Callitriche stagnalis Scop. Caltha palustris L. Calystegia sepium (L.) R. Br. subsp. sepium Cardamine amara L. subsp. amara Cardamine pratensis L. subsp. pratensis Carex acuta L. Carex acutiformis Ehrh. Carex distans L. Carex divisa Hudson Carex echinata Murray Carex elata All. subsp. elata Carex elongata L. Carex flava L. Carex hirta L. Carex lepidocarpa Tausch Carex melanostachya Bieb. ex Willd. Carex nigra (L.) Reichard Carex ovalis Good. Carex pallescens L. Carex paniculata L. Carex pendula Hudson 1042 SNEŽANA RADULOVIĆ ET AL.

Table 1. Continued Species Conservation status Carex pseudocyperus L. Carex riparia Curtis Carex rostrata Stokes Carex spicata Hudson Carex vesicaria L. Carex vulpina L. Catabrosa aquatica (L.) Beauv. Ceratophyllum demersum L. subsp. demersum IUCN-LC Ceratophyllum submersum L. subsp. submersum Chara sp(p) Chenopodium rubrum L. Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. Cirsium palustre (L.) Scop. Cladium mariscus (L.) Pohl Climacium dendroides (Hedw.) F. Weber & D. Mohr Crepis paludosa (L.) Moench Crypsis alopecuroides (Piller & Mitterp.) Schrader Crypsis schoenoides (L.) Lam. Cyperus flavescens L. Cyperus fuscus L. Cyperus glaber L. Cyperus glomeratus L. NCS-P Cyperus longus L. IUCN-LC Cyperus michelianus (L.) Link subsp. michelianus Cyperus serotinus Rottb. Cyperus strigosus L.* Deschampsia cespitosa (L.) Beauv. subsp. cespitosa Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv. * Echinochloa oryzoides (Ard.) Fritsch* Echinocystis lobata (Michx.) Torr. & A. Gray * Elatine alsinastrum L. Elatine triandra Schkuhr NCS-P Eleocharis acicularis (L.) Roemer & Schultes Eleocharis palustris (L.) Roemer & Schultes subsp. palustris NCS-P Eleocharis parvula (Roemer & Schultes) Link ex Bluff, Nees & Scha Elodea canadensis Michx* Elodea nuttallii (Planchon) St John* Epilobium hirsutum L. NCS-P Epilobium palustre L. Equisetum fluviatile L. NCS-SP Equisetum palustre L. PRELIMINARY CHECKLISTS FOR APPLYING SERCON TO RIVERS IN SERBIA 1043

Table 1. Continued Species Conservation status Equisetum telmateia Ehrh. Eupatorium cannabinum L. subsp. cannabinum Filaginella uliginosa (L.) Opiz subsp. uliginosa Filipendula ulmaria (L.) Maxim. subsp. ulmaria Fontinalis antipyretica Hedw. Galium elongatum C. Presl Glyceria declinata Breb. Glyceria fluitans (L.) R. Br. Glyceria maxima (Hartman) Holmberg Glyceria plicata (Fries) Fries Glycyrrhiza echinata L. Gratiola officinalis L. Herniaria glabra L. Hippuris vulgaris L. NCS-SP Hottonia palustris L. NCS-SP Hydrocharis morsus-ranae L. Impatiens glandulifera Royle* Impatiens parviflora DC. * Inula britannica L. Iris pseudacorus L. NCS-P Juncus articulatus L. IUCN-LC Juncus atratus Krocker Juncus buffonius L. Juncus compressus Jacq. Juncus conglomeratus L. Juncus effusus L. IUCN-LC Juncus gerardi Loisel. subsp. gerardi Juncus inflexus L. IUCN-LC Juncus ranarius Song. & Perr. Lemna gibba L. IUCN-LC Lemna minor L. IUCN-LC Lemna trisulca L. IUCN-LC Limosella aquatica L. NCS-P Lindernia procumbens (Krocker) Philcox IUCN-LC Lycopus europaeus L. Lycopus exaltatus L. fil. Lysimachia nummularia L. Lysimachia vulgaris L. Lythrum hyssopifolia L. Lythrum portula (L.) D. A. Webb Lythrum salicaria L. 1044 SNEŽANA RADULOVIĆ ET AL.

Table 1. Continued

Species Conservation status Lythrum tribracteatum Salzm. ex Sprengel NCS-P Lythrum virgatum L. Marsilea quadrifolia L. NCS-SP Mentha aquatica L. Mentha longifolia (L.) Hudson Mentha pulegium L. Menyanthes trifoliata L. Montia fontana L. Myosotis scorpioides L. Myosurus minimus L. Myriophyllum spicatum L. Myriophyllum verticillatum L. Najas marina L. IUCN-LC Najas minor All. IUCN-LC Nasturtium officinale R. Br. Nitella sp(p) Nuphar lutea (L.) Sm. NCS-SP Nymphaea alba L. NCS-SP Nymphoides peltata (S. G. Gmelin) O. Kuntze Oenanthe aquatica (L.) Poiret Oenanthe fistulosa L. Oenanthe silaifolia Bieb. Oenanthe stenoloba Schur Paspalum paspaloides (Michx) Scribner * Phalaris arundinacea L. subsp. arundinacea Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin. ex Steudel Plantago altissima L. Poa palustris L. Poa trivialis L. subsp. trivialis Polygonum amphibium L. Polygonum bistorta L. Polygonum hydropiper L. Polygonum lapathifolium L. Polygonum mite Schrank Polygonum persicaria L. Potamogeton acutifolius Link NCS-SP Potamogeton crispus L. IUCN-LC Potamogeton gramineus L. Potamogeton lucens L. IUCN-LC Potamogeton natans L. IUCN-LC PRELIMINARY CHECKLISTS FOR APPLYING SERCON TO RIVERS IN SERBIA 1045

Table 1. Continued Species Conservation status Potamogeton nodosus Poiret IUCN-LC, NCS-SP Potamogeton obtusifolius Mert. & Koch IUCN-LC, NCS-SP Potamogeton pectinatus L. Potamogeton perfoliatus L. Potamogeton pusillus L. IUCN-LC, NCS-SP Potamogeton trichoides Cham. & Schlecht. IUCN-LC, NCS-SP Potamogeton x zizzi Koch ex Roth NCS-SP Potentilla anserina L. subsp. anserina Potentilla erecta (L.) Rauschel Potentilla palustris (L.) Scop. Potentilla reptans L. Potentilla supina L. Quercus robur L. subsp. robur Ranunculus aquatilis L. Ranunculus circinatus Sibth. Ranunculus flammula L. subsp. flammula Ranunculus lateriflorus DC. Ranunculus lingua L. Ranunculus repens L. Ranunculus sceleratus L. subsp. sceleratus Ranunculus trichophyllus Chaix subsp. trichophyllus Reynoutria japonica Houtt. * Riccia fluitans L. Ricciocarpus natans (L.) Corda Robinia pseudacacia L. * Rorippa amphibia (L.) Besser Rorippa austriaca (Crantz) Besser Rorippa sylvestris (L.) Besser Rubus caesius L. Rumex conglomeratus Murray Rumex hydrolapathum Hudson Sagittaria sagittifolia L. IUCN-LC Salix alba L. subsp. alba Salix aurita L. Salix cinerea L. Salix fragilis L. Salvinia natans (L.) All. NCS-SP Scirpus holoschoenus L. Scirpus lacustris L. Scirpus maritimus L. subsp. maritimus Scirpus mucronatus L. 1046 SNEŽANA RADULOVIĆ ET AL.

Table 1. Continued Species Conservation status Scrophularia umbrosa Dumort. Scutellaria galericulata L. Sium latifolium L. Solanum dulcamara L. Solidago canadensis L. * Solidago gigantea (L.) Vill. subsp. serotina (O. Kuntze) McNeill* Sonchus palustris L. NCS-P Sparganium emersum Rehmann Sparganium erectum L. subsp. erectum Sparganium erectum L. subsp. microcarpum (Neuman) Domin Sparganium minimum Wallr. Spirodela polyrhiza (L.) Schleiden IUCN-LC Stachys palustris L. Stratiotes aloides L. Symphytum officinale L. subsp. officinale NCS-P Tolypella glomerata (Deonhsv) v. Le Tolypella intricata (Trent) v. Leonh NCS-SP Tolypella prolifera (Ziz) v. Leonh. NCS-SP Trapa agg. IUCN-LC Typha angustifolia L. IUCN-LC Typha latifolia L. Typha laxmannii Lepechin* Typha minima Funck NCS-SP Utricularia australis R. Br. IUCN-LC, NCS-P Utricularia vulgaris L. NCS-P Vallisneria spiralis L. * Veronica anagallis-aquatica L. Veronica anagalloides Guss. Veronica beccabunga L. Veronica scardica Griseb. Veronica scutellata L. Wolffia arrhiza (L.) Horkel ex Wimmer IUCN-LC Xanthium strumarium L. subsp. strumarium Zannichellia palustris L. NCS-P

** Non-native species; NCS – National Conservation Status, P - Protected, SP - Strictly Protected, LC - Least Concern PRELIMINARY CHECKLISTS FOR APPLYING SERCON TO RIVERS IN SERBIA 1047

Table 2 Checklist of freshwater macroinvertebrate families, grouped in accordance with the original list of BMWP families given in SERCON Manual (Boon et al., unpublished) and added families of Oligochaeta. TRICLADIDA Limnephilidae Scirtidae Dugesiidae Odontoceridae Planariidae Philopotamidae OLIGOCHAETA Phryganeidae Criodrilidae EPHEMEROPTERA Polycentropodidae Haplotaxidae Baetidae Psychomyiidae Enchytraeidae Caenidae Rhyacophilidae Naididae Ephemerellidae Sericostomatidae Lumbricidae Ephemeridae Uenoidae Lumriculidae Heptageniidae Pristinidae Oligoneuriidae DIPTERA Propappidae Potamanthidae Athericidae Tubificidae Leptophlebiidae Blephariceridae Ceratopogonidae HIRUDINEA PLECOPTERA Chironomidae Erpobdellidae Capniidae Empididae Glossiphoniidae Leuctridae Limoniidae Haemopidae Nemouridae Muscidae Hirudidae Perlidae Pediciidae Piscicolidae Perlodidae Psychodidae Taeniopterygidae Simuliidae MOLLUSCA Stratiomyidae Acroloxidae HEMIPTERA Tabanidae Ancylidae Aphelocheiridae Tipulidae Bithyniidae Corixidae Hydrobiidae Gerridae ODONATA Lymnaeidae Hebridae Aeshnidae Melanopsidae Hydrometridae Calopterygidae Neritidae Mesovelidae Coenagriidae Physidae Nepidae Cordulegasteridae Planorbidae Velidae Corduliidae Sphaeriidae Gomphidae Unionidae NEUROPTERA Lestidae Valvatidae Sialidae Libellulidae Viviparidae Platycnemididae TRICHOPTERA CRUSTACEA Beraeidae COLEOPTERA Asellidae Brachycentridae Dryopidae Astacidae Glossosomatidae Dytiscidae Corophiidae Goeridae Elminthidae Gammaridae Helicopsychidae Gyrinidae Talitridae Hydropsychidae Haliplidae Hydroptilidae Helodidae Lepidostomatidae Helophoridae Leptoceridae Hydraenidae ring between catchment areas, including the intro- the conservational status of native species such as duction of Salmo letnica and Pachychilon pictum Huso huso, Acipenser nudiventris, Acipenser stellatus, into the Vlasina reservoir. The main change from Alosa immaculate, Alosa caspia, Umbra krameri and the ‘original’ fish diversity comes from long-distance Thymallus thymallus (Simonović et al., 2010b). non-native fish introduction (25 species) through the southern invasive corridor of the Danube River. In addition to the number of fish species, their At the same time, human impact further deteriorates abundance indicates that the Sava River is the Ser- 1048 SNEŽANA RADULOVIĆ ET AL.

Table 3. Riverine species protected by the SGRS (2010a).

Invertebrate group Species name DECAPODA Astacus astacus (Linnaeus 1758) Austropotamobius torrentium (Schrank, 1803)

EPHEMEROPTERA Palingenia longicauda (Olivier, 1791)

TRICHOPTERA Allogamus auricollis Pictet, 1834 Beraeodes minutus Linnaeus, 1761 Drusus discolor Rambur, 1834 Drusus serbicus Marinkovic, 1971 Helicopsyche bacescui Orghidan et Botosaneanu, 1957 Lithax nigra Hagen, 1859 Rhyacophila obtusa Klapalek, 1894 (R. obtusidens) Thremma anomalum Mac Lachlan, 1877

Table 4. Non-native aquatic invertebrates.

Invertebrate group Species name

COELENTERATA Craspedacusta sowerbyi Lankester, 1880 Corbicula fluminea (O. F. Muller, 1774) Corbicula fluminalis (O. F. Muller, 1774) Dreissena polymorpha (Pallas, 1771) MOLLUSCA Dreissena bugensis (Andrusov, 1897) Physella acuta (Draparnaud, 1805) Sinanodonta woodiana (Lea, 1834) OLIGOCHAETA Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard, 1892

POLYCHAETA Hypania invalida (Grube, 1860) MALACOSTRACA Eriocheir sinensis (Milne-Edwards, 1853) bian inland water most threatened by the impact of between the recent classification and former taxo- non-native fish species. Many reservoirs also suffer nomic assignment (Salmo labrax). Nevertheless, re- from invasions, whose extent is related to the age and cent records of Acipenser nudiventris and Acipenser accessibility of the water body, as shown by the Vlasi- gueldenstaedti suggest that the available data on fish na reservoir (Simonović and Nikolić 1996, 1997). and lamprey diversity should be maintained until records can eventually be verified. In some cases the occurrence of particular list- ed fish species is uncertain (regardless of whether The Bird checklist they are indigenous or not). This may result from unreliable records (as for Pungitius platygaster and In total, 351 species of birds have been recorded in Coregonus peled), acknowledged misidentifications Serbia (Supplement 1, Table 6 and Table 7) (Puzović (Ictalurus nebulosus), lack of data about their status and Grubač 2000; Puzović (Ed.) 2000; Puzović, 2008; in both inaccessible areas (for Salmo marmoratus in Puzović et al., 2009, Tucakov et al., 2009), of which southwestern Serbia) and in large catchment sys- 45.2% (159) occur in wetlands or open waters and tems (Acipenser gueldenstaedti and Salmo labrax), 38 are particularly associated with rivers. Some of the current status of feral species, or discrepancy these waterfowl are present in high density: 9800- PRELIMINARY CHECKLISTS FOR APPLYING SERCON TO RIVERS IN SERBIA 1049

Table 5. The Fish check-list

Conservation status,, IUCN, Red Species List Category Europe ver3.1

Abramis ballerus (L.) LC Abramis brama Pavlov LC Abramis sapa (Pallas) LC Acipenser gueldenstaedti Brandt CR Acipenser nudiventris Lovetzky CR Acipenser ruthenus L. VU Acipenser stellatus Pallas CR Acipenser sturio L. CR Alburnoides bipunctatus (Bloch) LC Alburnus alburnus (L.) LC Alburnus scoranza (de Filippi) I, LC Alosa caspia (Eichwald) LC Alosa immaculata Bennet VU Anguilla anguilla (L.) CR Aristichthys nobilis (Richardson) I, NE Aspius aspius (L.) LC Barbatula barbatula (L.) LC Barbus balcanicus Kotlik, Tsigenopoulos, Rab & Berrebi LC Barbus barbus (L.) LC Barbus strumicae Kotlik, Tsigenopoulos, Rab & Berrebi LC Blennius fluviatilis Asso SE, LC Blicca bjoerkna (L.) LC Carassius carassius L. LC Carassius gibelio (Bloch) I, NE Chalcalburnus chalcoides (Gueldenstadt) LC Chondrostoma nasus (L.) LC Cobitis elongata Heckel et Kner D, LC Cobitis elongatoides Nalbant D, LC Cobitis ohridana Karaman SE, LC Cobitis taenia L. LC Coregonus peled (Gmelin) I, LC Cottus gobio L. LC Ctenopharyngodon idella Valenciennes I, NE Cyprinus carpio L. VU Esox lucius L. LC Eudontomyzon danfordi (Regan) D, LC Eudontomyzon mariae (Berg) LC Eudontomyzon stankokaramani (Karaman) SE, LC 1050 SNEŽANA RADULOVIĆ ET AL.

Table 5. Continued

Conservation status,, IUCN, Red Species List Category Europe ver3.1

Gasterosteus aculeatus L. *, LC Gobio gobio Valenciennes LC Gobio obtusirostris Valenciennes D, LC Gymnocephalus baloni Holcik et Hensel D, LC Gymnocephalus cernuus (L.) LC Gymnocephalus schraetser (L.) D, LC Hucho hucho (L.) D, EN Huso huso (L.) CR Hypophthalmichthys molitrix (Valenciennes) I, NT Ictalurus melas (Rafinesque) I, NE Ictalurus nebulosus (Le Sueur) I, NE Lepomis gibbosus (L.) I, NE Leucaspius delineatus (Heckel) LC Leuciscus idus (L.) LC Leuciscus leuciscus (L.) LC Leuciscus souffia Risso LC Lota lota (L.) LC Micropterus salmoides (Lacepede) I, NE Misgurnus fossilis (L.) LC Neogobius fluviatilis (Pallas) LC Neogobius gymnotrachelus (Kessler) I, LC Neogobius kessleri Günther LC Neogobius melanostomus (Pallas) I, LC Oncorhynchus mykiss (Walbaum) I, NE Pachychilon pictum (Heckel & Kner) SE, I, LC Pelecus cultratus (L.) LC Perca fluviatilis L. LC Perccottus glenii Dybowski I, NE Phoxinus phoxinus (L.) LC Polyodon spathula (Walbaum) CR Proterorhinus semilunaris Heckel LC Pseudorasbora parva (Schelegel) I, NE Pterygoplichthys pardalis (Castellnnau) I, NE Pungitius platygaster (Kessler) *, LC Rhodeus amarus (Pallas) LC Romanogobio kessleri (Dybowski) D, LC Romanogobio uranoscopus (Agassiz) D, LC Romanogobio vladykovi (Lukasch) D, LC PRELIMINARY CHECKLISTS FOR APPLYING SERCON TO RIVERS IN SERBIA 1051

Table 5. Continued

Conservation status,, IUCN, Red Species List Category Europe ver3.1

Rutilus ohridanus (Karaman) I, LC Rutilus rutilus (L.) LC Rutilus virgo (Lacepede) D, LC Sabanejewia balcanica (Karaman) D, LC Sabanejewia bulgarica (Drensky) D, LC Salmo farioides Karaman SE, I, NE Salmo labrax Pallas D, LC Salmo letnica Karaman I, DD Salmo macedonicus Karaman SE, I, DD Salmo marmoratus Cuvier SE, *, LC Salvelinus alpinus L. I, LC Salvelinus fontinalis (Mitchill) I, NE Scardinius erythrophthalmus (L.) LC Scardinius knezevici Vladykov & Petit 1930 SE, I, LC Silurus glanis L. LC Squalius cephalus (L.) LC Squalius vardarensis (Bonaparte) SE, I Stizostedion lucioperca (L.) LC Stizostedion volgense (Gmelin) LC Syngnathus abaster Risso I, LC Thymallus thymallus (L.) LC Tinca tinca (L.) LC Umbra krameri Walbaum VU Vimba vimba (Pallas) LC Zingel streber Siebold D, LC Zingel zingel (L.) LC

Status of the species: E = endemic, SE = subendemic, I = introduced, D = endemic to the Danube (Simonović, 2001). * = uncertain, # = vague subspecies; IUCN Red List : NE = not evaluated, DD = data deficient, LC = least concern, NT = near threatened, VU = vulnerable, EN = endangered, CR = critically endangered, EW = extinct in the wild, EX = extinct

12950 pairs of herons, 1700-2500 pairs of cormo- adopted in May 2010. However, the crucial pieces rants, 3140-3490 pairs of gulls and 2390-2680 pairs of secondary legislation were largely missing until of terns. The highest diversity is found on the Pan- the end of 2011, so the full implementation of the nonian plain, due to two large rivers and a number Water Law is expected only from 2012 onwards. As of fluvial lakes and ponds. far as protected areas (Water Law, Article 110) are concerned, the regulators distinguished six different SERCON in Serbian water policy categories, including areas designated for the protection of habitats or species, where the maintenance or A new Water Law (SGRS, 2010b) in Serbia was improvement of the ecological status of water bodies 1052 SNEŽANA RADULOVIĆ ET AL.

Table 6. Characteristic breeding riverine birds Species Status Acrocephalus palustris (Bechstein, 1789) a,*, F, I, SZV Alcedo atthis (Linnaeus, 1758) a,*, E, S, SZV Ardea cinerea Linnaeus, 1758 a,*, E, S, ZVL Charadrius dubius Scopoli, 1786 a,**, E, S, SZV Ciconia nigra (Linnaeus, 1758) a,**, C, S, SZV Cinclus cinclus (Linnaeus, 1758) a,*, E, S, SZV Haliaeetus albicilla (Linnaeus, 1758) a,**, C, I, SZV Hippolais icterina (Vieillot, 1817) a,**, E, S, SZV Locustella fluviatilis (J.Wolf, 1810) a,**, C, De, SZV Mergus merganser Linnaeus, 1758 a,*, B, I, SZV Milvus migrans Boddaert, 1783 a,**, B, De, SZV Motacilla alba Linnaeus, 1758 a,*, F, S, SZV Motacilla cinerea Tunstall, 1771 a,*, E, S, SZV Phalacrocorax carbo (Blumenbach, 1796) a,*, E, I, ZVL Remiz pendulinus (Linnaeus, 1758) a,**, E, S, SZV Riparia riparia (Linnaeus, 1758) a,*, F, S, SZV Sterna albifrons Pallas, 1764 a,**, B, S, SZV Sterna hirundo Linnaeus, 1758 a,**, C, S, SZV Tringa hypoleucos (Linnaeus, 1758) a,*, D, S, SZV a –regular breeding species Breeding population (2000-2011) b –rare or irregular or new breeding species A: 1-10 pairs c –extinct (breeding) species B: 11-100 pairs d –extinct (breeding) species but occurs irregularly C: 101-500 pairs e – migratory species D: 501-1,000 pairs f – bird species with <10 occurrences E: 1,001-10,000 pairs * occupies any altitude F: 10,001-100,000 pairs **occupies altitude <700 m G: 100,001-1,000,000 pairs *** occupies altitude >700 m H: ≥1,000,000 pairs

is an important factor in their protection. Compe- ther development will benefit regulators, competent tent Water Authorities, together with authorities for authorities and all stakeholders and decision-makers human health, environmental protection and nature in water protection and conservation. Of course, as conservation will designate protected areas. These Boon and Freeman (2009) point out, the challenge bodies will also establish specific monitoring pro- in river conservation is to find ways of moving from grams (or modify regular ones), if and where neces- survey and inventory into evaluation, from evalua- sary, in accordance with specific requirements and tion into conservation planning, and from conserva- other relevant legislation. The newly adopted water tion planning into practical conservation manage- status classification system, as well as the monitoring ment. In Serbia, as in many other countries, there is requirements under the Water Law, have yet to be im- still a long way to go. plemented. Thus, the publication of these locally/re- gionally adjusted checklists to accompany SERCON Acknowledgments - The hydromorphology dataset was pre- as a holistic nature conservation tool is timely. Fur- pared for the project ‘Biosensing Technologies and Global PRELIMINARY CHECKLISTS FOR APPLYING SERCON TO RIVERS IN SERBIA 1053

Table 7. Breeding riverine birds Species Status Acrocephalus arundinaceus (Linnaeus, 1758) a,*, F, I, SZV Acrocephalus palustris (Bechstein, 1789) a,*, F, I, SZV Acrocephalus schoenobaenus (Linnaeus, 1758) a,*, F, S, SZV Alcedo atthis (Linnaeus, 1758) a,*, E, S, SZV Anas platyrhynchos Linnaeus, 1758 a,*, F, De, ZVL Anser anser (Linnaeus, 1758) a,**, C, S, SZV Ardea cinerea Linnaeus, 1758 a,*, E, S, ZVL Charadrius dubius Scopoli, 1786 a,**, E, S, SZV Ciconia nigra (Linnaeus, 1758) a,**, C, S, SZV Cinclus cinclus (Linnaeus, 1758) a,*, E, S, SZV Cygnus olor (J.F.Gmelin, 1789) a,**, B, I, ZV Emberiza schoeniclus (Linnaeus, 1758) a,**, E, De, SZV Fulica atra Linnaeus, 1758 a,*, E, S, ZVL Gallinula chloropus (Linnaeus, 1758) a,*, E, S, ZVL Haliaeetus albicilla (Linnaeus, 1758) a,**, C, I, SZV Hippolais icterina (Vieillot, 1817) a,**, E, S, SZV Ixobrichus minutrus (Linnaeus, 1766) a, **, E, S, SZV Larus ridibundus Linnaeus, 1766 a,**, E, S, ZV Locustella fluviatilis (J.Wolf, 1810) a,**, C, De, SZV Mergus merganser Linnaeus, 1758 a,*, B, I, SZV Milvus migrans (Linnaeus, 1758) a,**, B, De, SZV Milvus milvus (Linnaeus, 1758) b,**, A, De, SZV Motacilla alba Linnaeus, 1758 a,*, F, S, SZV Motacilla cinerea Tunstall, 1771 a,*, E, S, SZV Phalacrocorax carbo (Blumenbach, 1796) a,*, E, I, ZVL Podiceps cristatus (Linnaeus, 1758) a**, E, S, SZV Remiz pendulinus (Linnaeus, 1758) a,**, E, S, SZV Riparia riparia (Linnaeus, 1758) a,*, F, S, SZV Sterna albifrons Pallas, 1764 a,**, B, S, SZV Sterna hirundo Linnaeus, 1758 a,**, C, S, SZV Tachybaptus ruficollis (Pallas, 1764) a,**, E, S, SZV Tringa hypoleucos (Linnaeus, 1758) a,*, D, S, SZV Vanellus vanellus (Linnaeus, 1758) a,*, E, S, SZV

Breeding population trends (2000-2011) c –extinct species H: ≥1,000,000 pairs S - stable or fluctuation: ±20% d –extinct species but occurs again Breeding population trends (2000-2011) I - increase: > 20% irregularly S - stable or fluctuation: ±20% De - decrease: > 20% e – migratory species I - increase: > 20% N – new breeding species f – bird species with <10 occurrences De - decrease: > 20% * occupies any altitude N – new breeding species National Conservation Status **occupies altitude <700 m National Conservation Status (SGRS (SGRS 5/2010). *** occupies altitude >700 m 5/2010). SZV - strictly protected SZV - strictly protected ZV - protected Breeding population (2000-2011) ZV - protected ZVL - protected by closed season A: 1-10 pairs ZVL - protected by closed season (zaštićena divlja vrsta sa lovostajem) B: 11-100 pairs (zaštićena divlja vrsta sa lovostajem) NV - not protecte C: 101-500 pairs NV - not protected D: 501-1,000 pairs a –regular breeding species E: 1,001-10,000 pairs b –rare or irregular or new breeding F: 10,001-100,000 pairs species G: 100,001-1,000,000 pairs 1054 SNEŽANA RADULOVIĆ ET AL.

System for Long-Term Research and Integrated Manage- Butorac, B., and S. Crnčević (1987). Zajednice Acoreto-Glyceri- ment of Ecosystems’ (Biosensing tehnologije i globalni etum Slavnić 56 i Sparganio-Glycerietum fluitantis Br.-Bl. sistem za kontinuirana istraživanja i integrisano upravljanje 25 na području jugozapadnog Banata. Zbornik Matice Srp- ekosistema) III 043002 grant, while the biodiversity dataset ske za prirodne Nauke, 72, 169-183, Novi Sad. was prepared the project Plant biodiversity of Serbia and the Cakić, P., Lenhardt, M., and Z. Petrović (2000). The first record Balkans – assessment, sustainable use and protection (Bio- of Gasterosteus aculeatus L. 1758 (Pisces: Gasterosteidae) diverzitet biljnog sveta Srbije i Balkanskog poluostrva –pro- in the Yugoslav section of the Danube. Ichthyologia. 32, cena, održivo korišćenje i zaštita) 173030 Grant, supported 79–82. by Ministry of Education and Science, Republic of Serbia Cakić, P., Lenhardt, M., Kolarević, J., Mićković B., and A. Hegediš (2004). Distribution of the Asiatic cyprinid Pseudoras- REFERENCES bora parva in Serbia and Montenegro. J. Fish. Biol. 65(5), 1431–1434. Armitage P.D., Moss D., Wright J. F., and M. T. Furse (1983). The performance of a new biological water quality score sys- Clarke, R. T., Furse, M. T., and J. F. Wright (1994). Testing and tem based on macroinvertebrates over a wide range of un- Further Development of RIVPACS Phase II: Aspects of Ro- polluted running-water sites. Water Res. 1, 333-347. bustness. Report to the National Rivers Authority, Bristol. Atanacković, A., Jakovčev-Todorović, D., Simić, V., Tubić, B., Cvijanović, G., Lenhardt, M., and A. Hegediš (2005). The first Vasiljević, B., Gačić, Z., and M. Paunović (2011). Oli- record of black bullhead Ameiurus melas (Pisces, Ictalu- gochaeta community of the main Serbian waterways. Wa- ridae) in Serbian waters. Arch. Biol. Sci. Belgrade. 57(4), ter Research and Management. 1(1), 47-54. 21–22. Blaženčić, J., Stevanović, B., Blaženčić, Ž., and V. Stevanović Danon, J., and Ž. Blaženčić (1965). Ekološka analiza livadskih za- (2006). Red Data List of Charophytes in the Balkans. Bio- jednica vlažnih i poluvlažnih staništa Stare planine. Arch. divers. Conserv. 15, 3445–3457. Biol. Sci. Belgrade. 17 (1-2), 101-112. Boon, P.J (2000). The development of integrated methods for as- Djikanović, V., Jakovčev-Todorović, D., Nikolić, V., Paunović, M., sessing river conservation value. In: Assessing the Integrity and P. Cakić (2008). Qualitative composition of communi- of Running Water, Hydrobiologia. 422/423 (Eds. M. Jung- ties of aquatic macroinvertebrates along the course of the wirth, S. Muhar, and S. Schmutz), 413–428. Golijska Moravica River (West-Central Serbia). Arch. Biol. Sci. Belgrade. 60 (1), 133-144. Boon, P.J (2004). The catchment approach as the scientific basis of the river basin management. Extended Abstract. Inter- Djuknić, J. Bjelanović, K, Durutović, A., and V. Jovanović (2010). nat. Assoc. Danube Res. (IAD), In Limnological Reports Ecological survey of macroinvertebrate communities in 35. Proceedings of the 35th Conference, Novi Sad. (Eds. the Vrelska Padina and the Ivanštica rivers (Eastern Ser- Teodorović I, Radulović S and Bloesh J), 11-19. bia). Proceedings of BALWOIS 2010, Ohrid, Republic of Macedonia. Boon, P.J.,and D.L. Howell (1997). Defining the quality of fresh waters: theme and variations. In: Freshwater Quality: De- Hegediš, A., Nikčević, M., Mićković, B., Janković, D. and R.K. fining the Indefinable? (Eds. P.J. Boon, and D.L. Howell), Anđus (1991). Discovery of the goby Neogobius gymnotra- 522–533. The Stationery Office, Edinburgh. chelus in Yugoslav fresh waters. Arch. Biol. Sci. Belgrade. Boon, P.J. and M. Freeman (2009). Assessing the conservation 43, 39-40. value of rivers. In: Assessing the Conservation Value of Horvat, I., Glavač, V., and H. Ellenberg (1974). Vegetation Südos- Fresh Waters: An International Perspective (Eds. P.J. Boon teuropas. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart. and C.M. Pringle), 142-165. IUCN (2011). IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, Version Boon, P.J., Holmes, N.T.H., Maitland, P.S., Rowell, T.A., and J. 2011.2. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org (Downloaded Davies (1997). A system for evaluating rivers for conser- on 22.December 2011). vation (SERCON): development, structure and function. In: Freshwater Quality: Defining the Indefinable? (Eds. P.J. Jakovčev-Todorović, D., Djikanović, V., Skorić, S., and P. Cakić Boon, and D.L. Howell), 299–326. The Stationery Office, (2010). Freshwater jellyfish Craspedacusta sowerbyi Lank- Edinburgh. ester, 1880 (Hydrozoa, Olindiidae) – 50 years’ observa- tions in Serbia. Arch. Biol. Sci. Belgrade. 62(1), 123-127. Boon, P.J., Wilkinson, J. and J. Martin (1998). The application of SERCON (System for Evaluating Rivers for Conserva- Janković, MM (1953). Vegetacija Velikog Blata. Glasnik tion) to a selection of rivers in Britain. Aquat. Conserv. 8, Prirodnjačkog muzeja srpske zemlje, Serija B, 5-6, 59-111, 597–616. Belgrade. PRELIMINARY CHECKLISTS FOR APPLYING SERCON TO RIVERS IN SERBIA 1055

Kottelat, M., and J. Freyhof (2007). Handbook of European fresh- Panjković, B (2005). Akvatična i semiakvatična vegetacija Ap- water fishes. Kottelat, Cornol, Switzerland and Freyhof, atinskog i Monoštorskog rita. PhD thesis. Faculty of Sci- Berlin, Germany, 646. ence, University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad.

Lakušić, D., Blaženčić, J., Ranđelović, V., Butorac, B., Vukojičić, S., Paunović, M., Jakovčev-Todorović, D., Simić, V., Stojanović, B., Zlatković, B., Jovanović, S., Šinžar-Sekulić, J., Žukovec, D., and A. Petrović (2006). Trophic relations between macro- Ćalić, I., and D. Pavićević (2005). Staništa Srbije – Priručnik invertebrates in the Vlasina River (Serbia). Arch. Biol. Sci. sa opisima i osnovnim podacima, In: Staništa Srbije, Re- Belgrade. 58(2), 105-114. zultati projekta “Harmonizacija nacionalne nomenklature Paunović, M., Jakovčev-Todorović, D., Simić, V., Stojanović, B., u klasifikaciji staništa sa standardima međunarodne za- and P. Cakić (2007). Macroinvertebrates along the Serbian jednice” (Ed. D. Lakušić). Institut za Botaniku i Botanička section of the Danube River (stream km 1429-925). Biolo- Bašta “Jevremovac”, Biološki fakultet, Univerzitet u gia, Bratislava, 62(2), 214-221. Beogradu, Ministarstvo za nauku i zaštitu životne sredine Republike Srbije. Available at: http://www.ekoplan.gov.rs/ Preston, C. D., and J. M. Croft (1997). Aquatic Plants in Britain srl/Stanista-Srbije-76-c53-content.htm, http://habitat.bio. and Ireland. Harley Books, Colchester. bg.ac.yu/ . Puzović S. (Ed.) (2000): Atlas of birds of prey of Serbia – their Lazić, D. (2006). Vaskularna flora i vegetacija OKM HSs DTD na breeding distribution and abundance 1977-1996. Institute području Bačke. PhD thesis. Faculty of Science, University for Nature Protection Serbia, Beograd, 268 pp.2. of Novi Sad, Novi Sad. Puzović, S. and B. Grubač (2000). Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Lenhardt, M., Hegediš, A., Mićković, B., Višnjić-Jeftić, Ž., Smedere- Pp. 725-745, In: M.F. Heath and M.I. Evans (Eds.) Impor- vac, M., Jarić, I., Cvijanović, G., and Z. Gačić (2006). First tant Bird Areas in Europe: Priority sites for conservation. record of the North American paddlefish (Polyodon BirdLife Conservation Series, No. 8, 2: Southern Europe. spathula Walbaum, 1792) in the Serbian part of the Dan- Cambridge, UK:BirdLife. ube River. Arch. Biol. Sci. Belgrade. 58 (3), 27. Puzović S (2008). Nest occupation and Prey grabbing by Saker Lenhardt, M., Marković, G., Hegedis, A., Maletin, S., Ćirković, M., Falcon (Falco cherrug) on power lines in the Province of and Z. Marković (2011). Non-native and translocated fish Vojvodina (Serbia). Arch. Biol. Sci. Belgrade. 60(2), 271- species in Serbia and their impact on the native ichthyo- 277. fauna. Rev. Fish Biol. Fisheries. 21, 407–421. Puzović, S., Sekulić, G., Grubač, B., and M. Tucakov (2009). Značajna područja za ptice u Srbiji (Important Bird Ar- Marić, S., Hegediš, A., Nikolić, V., and P. Simonović (2004). Con- eas in Serbia). Ministarstvo životne sredine i prostornog servation status of two Eastern Balkan endemic fish spe- planiranja, Zavod za zaštitu prirode Srbije, Pokrajin- cies in Serbia and proposal for their protection. Acta Zoo- ski sekretarijat za zaštitu životne sredine i održivi razvoj. logica bulgarica. 56, 213-222. Beograd. Marić, S., Sušnik, S., Simonović, P., and A. Snoj (2006). Phylo- Radulović, S (2000). Vodena vegetacija Koviljskog rita. MSc the- geographic study of brown trout from Serbia, based on sis. Faculty of Science, University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad. mitochondrial DNA control region analysis. Genetique, Selection, Evolution. 38, 411-430. Radulović, S., Vučković, M., Borišev, M., Pajević, S., and B. Panjković (2004). An evaluation of phytocoenological Marković, V., Atanacković, A Marić, S., Razpet, A., Nikolić, V., presence of macrophytes in the Stari Begej – Carska Bara, and P. Simonović (2011). Genetic differentiation of Euro- In: Scientific Concepts and Implementation of Sustain- pean grayling (Thymallus thymallus) populations in Ser- able Transboundary River Basin Management, 35 (Eds. I. bia, based on mitochondrial and nuclear DNA analyses. Teodorović, S. Radulović, and J. Bloesch), 469-479. Inter- Genetics, Selection, Evolution. 43, 2. nat. Assoc. Danube Res., Limnological Reports 35, Visio Mundi Academic Press. Tubić, B., Vasiljević, B., Simić, V., Tomović, J., Nikolić, V., and M. Paunović (2011). Indicative status assessment of the Velika Radulović, S (2005). Ekologija i disribucija akvatičnih fitocenoza Morava River based on aquatic macroinvertebrates. Water Carske bare u GIS tematskom modelu. PhD thesis. Faculty Research and Management. 1(3), 47-53. of Science, University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad.

O’Hare, J.M., O’Hare, M.T.., Gurnell, A.M., Dunbar, M.J., Scarlett, Radulović, S., Laketić, D., and D. Vukov (2010). A riverside tale: P.M. and C. Laize (2010). Physical constraints on the dis- the assessment of altered habitat effects on macrophytes tribution of macrophytes linked with flow and sediment assemblage on the Tamis River, Serbia, Arch. Biol. Sci. Bel- dynamics in British rivers. River Res Applic, Early View grade. 62(4), 1163-1174. 1056 SNEŽANA RADULOVIĆ ET AL.

Radulović, S., Laketić, D., and I. Teodorović (2011). A botanical Simonović, P., Marić, S., and V. Nikolić (2006b). Occurrence of classification of standing waters in Serbia and its applica- paddlefishPolyodon spathula (Walbaum, 1792) in the low- tion to conservation. Aquat. Conserv. 21, 510–527. er Danube River of Serbia. Aquat. Invas. 1(3), 183-185. Ranđelović, V (1988). Močvarna vegetacija uz gornji tok Južne Simonović, P., Marić, S., and V. Nikolić (2007). Trout Salmo spp. Morave. BSc thesis. Faculty of Science, University of Novi complex in Serbia and adjacent regions of western Bal- Sad, Novi Sad. kans: reconstruction of evolutionary history from external morphology. J.Fish.Biol. 70(C), 359-380. Ranđelović, V (2002). Flora i vegetacija Vlasinske visoravni. PhD thesis. Faculty of Biology, University of Belgrade, Bel- Simonović, P., Nikolić, V., and S. Grujić (2010a). Amazon sailfin grade. catfish Pterygoplichthys pardalis (Castelnau, 1855) (Lori- cariidae, Siluriformes), a new fish species recorded in the Rodwell J.S (Ed. 1995). Aquatic Communities, Swamps and Tall- Serbian section of the Danube River. Biotechnol. and Bio- herb Fens. British Plant Communities, Vol. 4, Cambridge technol. Eq. 24, 655-660. University Press: Cambridge. Simonović, P., Stefanović, K., and J. Tomović (2010b). Influence Sekulić, N., Budakov, Lj., and D. Branković (1998). Distribution of invasive alien fish species to the ecological status of the of the European mudminnow Umbra krameri (Umbridae) Danube River and its main tributaries in Serbia after terms in Serbia. Ital. J. Zool. 65, 381-382. of the EU Water Framework Directive. In: The Danube in Sekulić, N., Cakić, P., Lenhardt, M., Vučić, D., and Lj. Buda- Serbia - The Results of National Program of the Second Joint kov (1999). Short-snouted pipefish Syngnathus abaster Danube Survey (Eds. P. Simonović, V. Simić, S. Simić, and (Acanthopterygii. Syngnathidae) in the Yugoslav section M. Paunović ), 281 – 302. Republic of Serbia, Ministry of of the Danube. Acta Biologica Yugoslavica, Ichthyologia. Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management, Univer- 31(1),79. sity of Belgrade, Institute for Biological Research “Siniša Stanković”, Belgrade and University of Kragujevac, Faculty SGRS (2010a). Pravilnik o proglašenju i zaštiti strogo zaštićenih of Science, Kragujevac. i zaštićenih divljih vrsta biljaka, životinja i gljiva. Službeni Šinžar-Sekulić, J., Komarnicki, A., and V. Stevanović (2006). glasnik Republike Srbije 5/2010. [Book of rules on declar- Changes of habitat types through several decades in the ing and protection of strictly protected and protected wild Danube region in Serbia. 36th IAD Conference. Austrian species of plants, animals and fungi, Official Gazette of Re- Committee Danube Research/IAD, 322-325, Vienna, Aus- public of Serbia 5/2010]. tria. SGRS (2010b). Zakon o vodama. Službeni Glasnik Republike Šipoš, Š ., Miljanović, B., and Lj. Pejčić (2004). The first record of Srbije 30/2010. [Water Law, Official Gazette of Republic of Amur sleeper (Perccottus glenii Dybowski, 1877, fam. Od- Serbia 3 0/2010] ontobutidae) in the Danube River. In: Scientific Concepts Simonović, P (1999). Phylogenetic relationships between the and Implementation of Sustainable Transboundary River Ponto-Caspian gobies and their relationship to the Atlan- Basin Management, 35 (Eds. I. Teodorović, S. Radulović, tic-Mediterranean Gobiinae. J. Fish. Biol. 54, 533-555. and J. Bloesch), 509–510. Simonović, P (2001). Ribe Srbije. NNK International, Zavod za Slavnić, Ž (1940). Prilog halofitskoj flori i vegetaciji jugoistočne zaštitu prirode Srbije, Biološki fakultet, Beograd. Srbije. Glasnik skopskog naučnog društva, 22, 65-77, Sko- plje. Simonović, P., and V. Nikolić (1996). Freshwater fish of Serbia: an annotated check list with some faunistic and zoogeo- Slavnić, Ž (1956). Vodena i barska vegetacija Vojvodine. Zbornik graphical considerations. Bios. 4, 137-156. Macedonia, Matice srpske, serija prirodnih nauka, 10, 5-72. Greece. Stevanović, V (Ed. 1999). Crvena knjiga Flore Srbije 1, iščezli i Simonović, P., and S. Marić (2006). Comments of atricle of Simić krajnje iščezli taksoni. Ministry of environment of the and Šorić about new data on ichthyofauna of Serbia. Arch. Republic of Serbia, Faculty of Biology, University of Bel- Biol. Sci. Belgrade. 58(4), 45-46. grade, Institution for protection of nature of the Republic of Serbia. Simonović P., Valković B., and M. Paunović (1998). Round goby Neogobius melanostomus, a new Ponto-Caspian element Stevanović, V., Jovanović, S., Lakušić, D., and M. Niketić (1995). for Yugoslavia. Folia Zool. Brno. 47, 305-312. Diverzitet vaskularne flore Jugoslavije sa pregledom vrsta od međunarodnog značaja, In: Biodiverzitet Jugoslavije Simonović, P., Marić, S., and V. Nikolić (2006a). Records of Amur sa pregledom vrsta od međunarodnog značaja (Eds. V. sleeper Perccottus glenii (Odontobutidae) in Serbia and its Stevanović, and V. Vasić ). Ekolibri, Biološki fakultet Uni- recent status. Arch. Biol. Sci. Belgrade. 58(1), 7-8. verziteta u Beogradu, Belgrade. PRELIMINARY CHECKLISTS FOR APPLYING SERCON TO RIVERS IN SERBIA 1057

Stevanović, V., Šinžar-Sekulić, J., and B. Stevanović (2003). On Waserokosystemen des Hydrosystems Donau-Theiss- the distribution and ecology of macrophytic flora and veg- Donau. Limnologische Berichte Donau, Band I, 215-218, etation in the river Danube reservoir between Žilovo islet Wien. and the mouth of the Nera tributary (river km 10090 and Vučković, M., Radulović, S., and D. Strajin (1999). Adventivne 10075). Archiv fur Hydrobiologie Suppl., Large rivers, 14(3- biljke – pridošlice uz vodene biotope severne Bačke. 4), 283-295. Monografija vode severne Bačke, Edicija Tija voda. Pčesa Stevanović, V., Šinžar-Sekulić, J., and B. Stevanović (2004). Ex- ’99, Novi Sad. pansion of the adventive species Paspalum paspaloides Vukov, D. (2003). Akvatične makrofite reke Zasavica. MSc thesis. (Michx) Schribner, Echinochloa oryzoides (Ard.) Fritsch Faculty of Science, University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad. and Cyperus strigosus L. in the Yugoslav part of the Dan- ube reservoir (km 1090-1075), In: Scientific Concepts and Vukov, D. (2008). Floristička i ekološka analiza vaskularnih mak- Implementation of Sustainable Transboundary River Basin rofita reke Dunav u Srbiji. PhD thesis. Faculty of Science, Management, 35 (Eds. I. Teodorović, S. Radulović, and J. University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad. Bloesch), 399-405. Internat. Assoc. Danube Res., Limno- Wilkinson J., Martin J., Boon P.J and N.T.H. Holmes N.T.H (1998). logical Reports 35, Visio Mundi Academic Press. Convergence of field survey protocols for SERCON (Sys- Stojanović, S., Butorac, B., Vučković, M., Stanković, Ž., Žderić, M., tem for Evaluating Rivers for Conservation) and RHS Kilibarda, P., and Lj. Radak (1994). Biljni svet kanala Vrbas (River Habitat Survey) Aquat Conserv. 8, 579–596. - Bezdan. Faculty of Science, University of Novi Sad, Novi Wright, J. F., Moss, D., and M. T. Furse (1998a). Macroinverte- Sad, 1-110. brate richness at running-water sites in Great Britain: a Tomović, J., Csanyi, B., Zorić, K., Atanacković, A., Tubić, B., Cakić, comparison of species and family richness. Verhandlun- P., and M. Paunović (2010). Alien Mollusca in Serbian wa- gen der Internationalen Vereinigung für theoretische und ters. Proceedings of BALWOIS 2010, Ohrid, Republic of angewandte Limnologie., 26, 1174-1178. Macedonia. Wright, J.F., Furse, M.T., and D. Moss (1998b). River classifica- Topuzović, M., Pavlović, D., and A. Ostojić (2009). Temporal and tion using invertebrates: RIVPACS applications. Aquat. spatial distribution of macrophytes in the Gruža Reservoir Conserv. 8, 617-631. (Serbia). Arch. Biol. Sci. Belgrade. 61(2), 289-296. Wright, J.F., Moss, D., Clarke, R.T., and M. T. Furse (1997). Bio- Tucakov, M., Ham, I., Gergelj, J., Barna, K., Žuljević, A., Sekereš, logical assessment of river quality using the new version O., Sekulić, G., Vučanović, M., Balog, I., Radišić, D., Vig, of RIVPACS (RIVPACS III). In: Freshwater quality: Defin- L., Hulo, I., Simić, D., Skorić, S., Stojnić, N., Spremo, N., ing the indefinable? (Eds. P.J. Boon, and D.L. Howell), 102- Ružić, M., Puzović, S., Stanković, B., Grujić, D and Š. Lukač 108. The Stationery Office, Edinburgh. (2009). Kolonije galebova i čigri u Srbiji (Gull and Tern Živić, I., Marković, Z., and M. Brajković (2002). First check list of colonies in Serbia). Ciconia, 18, 29-80. Serbian Trichoptera. Folia Historico-naturalia Musei Ma- Veljić, M (2006). Vascular Flora of the Uvac River Gorge in Ser- traensis. 26, 269-277. bia. Arch. Biol. Sci. Belgrade. 58(2), 125-133. Živić, I., Marković, Z., and J. Ilić (2005). Composition, structure, Vučković, M., and B. Panjković (1999). Hippuris vulgaris L. In and seasonal dynamics of macrozoobenthos in the Tem- The red data book of flora of Serbia 1 – extinct and critically ska and Visočica Rivers (Serbia). Arch. Biol. Sci. Belgrade. endangered taxa (Ed. V. Stevanović), 296-298. Ministry of 57(2), 107-118. environment of the Republic of Serbia, Faculty of Biology, Zorić, K., Jakovčev-Teodorović, D., Djikanović, V., Vasiljević, B., University of Belgrade, Institution for protection of nature Tomović, J., Atanacković, A., Simić, V., and M. Paunović of the Republic of Serbia. (2011). Distribution of the Ponto-Caspian polychaeta Hy- Vučković, M., Stojanović, S., Butorac, B., Radulović, S., and D. pania invalida (Grube, 1860) in inland waters of Serbia. Lazić (1997). Die naturwertw der Flora in anthropogenen Aquat Invas. 6(1), 33-38.