Korean Journal of Ecology and Environment (생태와환경)

The Korean Society of Limnology (한국수생태학회)
권호 표지

Impact of Bank-protection Work on Stenopsyche marmorata (Trichoptera) in the Middle Reaches of the Chikuma River in Central Japan

Chikuma 강 중류 수역에서 하안 보호 공사가 Stenopsyche marmorata (Trichoptera)에 미치는 영향 (Central Japan)

  • Published : 2004.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Since a large bank-protection works project was undertaken during winter in the middle reaches of the Chikuma, the riverbed structure was drastically altered. In order to assess the short-term impact of bank-protection works on the abundance Pattern of Stenopsyche marmorata (Trichoptera) from spring to early summer, we conducted an investigation on the capture of adults using light traps before and after construction work. The patterns of the daily capture of S. marmorata and the Namely, after construction, the daily catch of adult numbers increased only slightly during the investigation periods. This suggested that the age structure of the S. marmorata larval population had changed in the construction area. Our data suggest that bank-protection projects impact the abundance pattern of adult caddisflies in the river ecosystem.

동계에 Chikuma 강 중류 수역에서 대규모 하안 보호 공사가 시행된 이후로 강의 하상 구에 급격한 변화가 나타났다. 본 연구는 연속하는 춘계-하계 기간 동안 날도래목 곤충의 일종인 Stenopsyche marmorata의 밀도 유형에 대한 하안 보호 공사의 영향을 평가하기 위해 수행되었다. Light trap을 이용하여 날도래 성충을 포획하여 분석한 결과에 의하면, S. marmorata에 대한 일일 포획의 양상과 포획 개체의 누적 밀도는 공사 전후에 상이하게 나타났다. 즉, 공사 후의 조사 기간 동안일일 포획 성충의 밀도는 약간 증가하였다. 이 결과는 공사 지역에서 S. marmorata 유충 개체군의 연령 구조가 바뀌었고, 하안 보호 공사가 Chikuma강 생태계에 서식하는 날도래 성충의 밀도 패턴에 영향을 미쳤음을 시사한다.

Keywords

References

  1. Armitage, P.D. and C.E. Cannan. 1998. Nested multi-scale surveys in lotic system-tool for management. In: Bretschko, G., Helesic, J. (eds.), Advances in River Bottom Ecology, pp. 293-314. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden.
  2. Brooks, S.S. and A.J. Boulton. 1991. Recolonization dynamics of benthic macroinvertebrates after artificial and natural disturbances in an Australian temporary system. Australian Journal of Marin and Freshwater Research 42: 295-308
  3. Downes, B.J., L.A. Barmuta, P.G. Fairweather, D.P. Faith, M.J. Keough, P.S. Lake, B.D. Mapstone and G.P. Quinn. 2002. Monitoring ecological impacts: concepts and practice in f lowing waters. P.434, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
  4. Gose, K. 1970. Life history and instar analysis of Stenopsyche griseipennis (Trichoptera). Jpn. J. Limnol. 31: 96-106
  5. Hurlbert, S.J. 1984. Pseudoreplication and the design of ecological field experiments. Ecological Monographs 54: 187-211
  6. Morse, J.C. (editor) 1999. Trichoptera World Checklist. http://entweb.clemson.edu/database/trichopt/index.htm, effective 22 May 1999
  7. Nishimura, N. 1984. Ecological studies on the netspinning caddisfly, Stenopsyche marmorata Navas (Trichoptera: Stenopsychidae), 6. Larval and pupal density in the Maruyama River, central Japan, with special reference to floods and afterflood recovery processes. Physiol. Ecol. Japan. 21:1-34
  8. Reice, S.R., R.C. Wissmar and R.J. Naiman. 1990. Disturbance regimes, resilience, and recovery of animal communities and habitats in lotic ecosystem. Environmental Momt. 14: 647-659
  9. Strwart-Oaten, A., W.M. Murdoch, K.R., Parker. 1986. Environmental impact assessment: 'pseudoreplication' in time? Ecology 67: 929-940
  10. Underwood, A.J. 1992. Beyond BACI: the detection of environmental impact on populations in the real, but variable world. Journal of Experimental Marin Biology and Ecology 161: 145-178
  11. Underwood, A.J. 1994. On beyond BACI: sampling designs that might reliably detect environmental disturbances. Ecological Applications 4: 3-15
  12. Wigging, G.B. 1996. Trichoptera families. In: Merritt, R.W. and Cummins, K.W. (editors), An introduction to the aquatic insects of Noth America-3rd edition. 309-386. Kendall-Hunt Publishing Company, USA
  13. Wright, J.F., R.T. Clarke, J.M. Gunn, J.M. Winder, N.T. Kneebone and J. Davy-Bowker. 2003. Response of the flora and macroinvertebrate fauna of a chalk stream site to changes in management. Freshwater Biology 48: 894-911