ON THE ICHTHYOFAUNA OF SOME RIVERS IN THE VOLGA BASIN Текст научной статьи по специальности «Биологические науки»

ON THE ICHTHYOFAUNA OF SOME RIVERS IN THE VOLGA BASIN

A.B. Ruchin

Joint Directorate of the Mordovia State Nature Reserve and National Park «Smolny», Russia

e-mail: [email protected]

Received: 29.09.2021. Revised: 02.12.2021. Accepted: 18.12.2021.

The ichthyofauna of rivers changes in many countries and regions. This is due to a variety of factors and is more often the result of anthropogenic influences. We have studied the ichthyofauna of six river sections (one station on each river). In total, 2,036 specimens were captured. Twenty-four fish species have been identified from 11 families. Four of them have been recorded in all rivers (Albur-nus alburnus, Leuciscus leuciscus, Rutilus rutilus/lacustris, Squalius cephalus). In most rivers, these species were dominant in terms of numbers. Two invasive species have been identified. These are Perccottus glenii (Tesha River) and Neogobius melanostomus (Oka River). Key words: fishes, biodiversity, Penza region, Nizhny Novgorod region, Republic of Mordovia, Vladimir region

https://dx.doi.org/10.24412/cl-31646-2686-7117-2022-30-44-50

Introduction

Nowadays one of the most important goal is to conserve the biological diversity on the planet (May, 2002; April et al., 2011). There are significant changes in the ichthyofauna in almost all continents, seas and river basins (Onorato et al., 2000; Ruchin, 2004; Casatti et al., 2006; Artaev et al., 2020). The species diversity and the number of native species are declining due to anthropogenic reasons such as the destruction of small rivers, the regulation of the flow of medium and large rivers, eutrophication, toxification and thermification of rivers, lakes and reservoirs (Eyckmans et al., 2011; Glowacki & Penczak, 2012; Gavrilo & Martynova, 2017; Zvezdin et al., 2021). It violates the structure and functioning of freshwater ecosystems, communities and populations of individual native fish species, the emergence and prosperity of invasive species (Artaev & Ruchin, 2016; Petsch, 2016; Chen et al., 2017; Busarova et al., 2019; Ruchin et al., 2019; Boznak et al., 2020; Bashinsky, 2021). On the other hand, in some rivers, there are processes of restoration of local ichthyofauna due to a decrease in anthropogenic activity or improvement of water quality (Echevarría & González, 2018; Glowacki et al., 2021).

Therefore, it is important not only to identify the modern ichthyofauna of watercourses and reservoirs, but also to trace the dynamic processes that occur in ecosystems. Since 2000, full-scale studies have been conducted on the ichthyofauna of reservoirs in the basin of Moksha and Sura Rivers (Volga River basin). After these studies, researchers published several books that summed up the results of 15 years of studies (Ruchin et al., 2016; Artaev & Ruchin, 2017a). Subsequently, such studies were no longer conducted and small monitoring surveys were carried out in many regions. This article provides information about the ichthyofauna of several rivers in some regions.

Material and Methods

The material for the study was collected in July-August 2020 in the borders of the Republic of Mordovia, Vladimir, Penza and Nizhny Novgorod regions (Volga River basin, basins of tributaries of the 1st order - Oka and Sura). There was one trapping station on each river (Fig.). The catches were carried out with a small delirium (mesh 4-5 mm, length 10 m). At each station, a 40-120 m long section of the riverbed was fished, often from both banks. In total, 2036 individuals of different fish species were caught. Species identification was carried out on the basis of morphological indicators. The taxonomy of fish is given according to the modern database of Fricke et al. (2021).

Fig. Places to study the ichthyofauna of some rivers of the Volga River basin: 1 - Oka River (Murom city); 2 - Tesha River (Lipovka village); 3 - Moksha River (Tengushevo village); 4 - Vysha River (Chernoyar village); 5 - Atmis River (Novaya Nyavka village); 6 - Alatyr River (Beregovye Syresi village).

Results and Discussion

In total, 24 fish species were caught. Four of them were recorded in all rivers. These are Alburnus alburnus, Leuciscus leuciscus, Rutilus rutilus/lacustris, Squalius cephalus (Table).

Table. Ichthyofauna of riverbed sections of some rivers of the Volga River basin (the

Oka River basin Sura Riv-

Species er basin

Oka River Tesha Moksha Vysha Atmis Alatyr

(1.08.20) River River River River River

(30.07.20) (14.07.20) (19.07.20) (19.07.20) (22.07.20)

Esocidae

Esox lucius 5 7 1 3 1

Cyprinidae

Carassius gibelio 1

Leuciscidae

Abramis brama 2 17 3 4

Alburnus alburnus 156 26 120 35 57 114

Alburnoides rossicus 31 50

Blicca bjoerkna 1

Chondrostoma variabile 1

Leuciscus aspius 17

Leuciscus idus 3

Leuciscus leuciscus 24 38 40 26 3 6

Pelecus cultratus 1

Rutilus rutilus/lacustris* 130 73 156 190 146 82

Scardinius erythrophthalmus 2 2

Squalius cephalus 7 1 5 33 38 11

Acheilognathidae

Rhodeus amarus 2 5 116 12 23

Gobionidae

Romanogobio albipinnatus 38 1

Gobio volgensis 106 8 15

Nemacheilidae

Barbatula barbatula 1

Cobitidae

Cobitis taenia 2 3

Lotidae

Lota lota 1

Percidae

Gymnocephalus cernuus 2 7 1 3

Perca fluviatilis 10 1 1

Odontobutidae

Perccottus glenii 1

Gobiidae

Neogobius melanostomus 8

Number of individuals 369 260 412 435 318 242

Number of species 14 9 14 9 12 8

Note: * - the taxonomic status of the captured Rutilus specimens is still unc fication by molecular methods (Artaev et al., 2021).

ear, as it requires clari-

In the surveyed sections of the Oka and Moksha rivers, there was the greatest species diversity: 14 species were identified. Both rivers belong to the middle rivers; therefore, the species diversity of fish is greater there. The remaining rivers are small rivers. They have special hydrological regime (usually high flow velocity, small width and depth). Depending on a river, we caught from eight to 12 species in them.

In the Oka River, the dominant species were Alburnus alburnus and Rutilus ru-tilus/lacustris, whose numbers accounted for 42.3% and 35.2% of the total number of captured specimens, respectively. The number of other species was small.

In the Moksha River, the same two species had also the greatest numbers accounting for 37.9% (Rutilus rutilus/lacustris) and 29.1% (Alburnus alburnus). The number of Leuciscus leuciscus and Romanogobio albipinnatus catches was quite high (9.7 and 9.2%, respectively). In the Tesh River, two species prevailed in number: Gobio volgensis (40.8%) and Rutilus rutilus/lacustris (28.1%).

In the Vysha River, the dominant species were Rutilus rutilus/lacustris and Rhodeus amarus, whose numbers accounted for 43.7% and 26.7% of the total number of captured specimens, respectively. In the Atmis River, the dominant species was Rutilus rutilus/lacustris (45.9%), and the subdominants were Alburnus alburnus and Alburnoides rossicus (17.9 and 15.7%, respectively). In the Alatyr River, the dominant species was Alburnus alburnus (47.1%).

All species are more or less common inhabitants of the rivers of the European part of Russia. We would like to highlight several interesting findings. Carassius gibelio has been recorded in the Oka River. This species was considered a limno-phile, but in the last 30-40 years it has been observed in rivers, brackish waters and other atypical reservoirs, which is associated with its success in reproduction by gy-nogenesis, demographic and competitive features (Vetemaa et al., 2005; Artaev & Ruchin, 2016; Fuad et al., 2021; Kuljanishvili et al., 2021).

More than 20 years ago, Alburnoides rossicus was considered rare and was included in the federal and many regional Red Books. However, our studies of the beginning of the XX century have shown that this species is quite common in many rivers of the European part of Russia (Ruchin et al., 2007, 2009). It had been assumed that: 1) Alburnoides rossicus was rarely noted as a small fish due to irregular studies; 2) Alburnoides rossicus increased its numbers after a decline in numbers in the 1990s. Now, it is obvious that both assumptions are correct and in some regions, the abundance of this species is consistently high (Artaev & Ruchin, 2017a,b). Rhodeus amarus is considered a native species for most of its current range in Europe. A sharp decline in its number from 1960 to 1980 in Europe, associated with water pollution, led to the establishment of strict national and international rules for the protection of this species. Currently, the species lives in many reservoirs and its number is high (Kozhara et al., 2007; Bryja et al., 2010).

Perccottus glenii is an invasive ubiquitous species that is common in limnic ecosystems and less common in rivers (Ruchin et al., 2019; Radocaj et al., 2021). It was found in the riverbed of the Tesha River. Despite the rather strong current of the river, one specimen was caught in a thicket of macrophytes near the shore. Neogobius melanostomus is another invasive species that has spread from the native Ponto-Caspian region throughout Europe and up to the Great Lakes in North America. Un-

like the previous species, it is more common in rivers, large lakes, bays (Corkum et al., 2004; Kornis et al., 2012). It was found in a small bay with a slow current in the Oka River.

References

April J., Mayden R.L., Hanner R.H., Bernatchez L. 2011. Genetic calibration of species diversity among North America's freshwater fishes // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Vol. 108. Iss. 26. P. 10602-10607. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1016437108

Artaev O.N., Ermakov O.A., Vekhov D.A., Konovalov A.F., Levina M.A., Pozdeev I.V., Ruchin A.B., Alyushin I.V., Iljin V.Yu. & Levin B.A. 2021. Genetic screening of distribution pattern of roaches Rutilus rutilus and R. lacustris (Cyprinidae) in broad range of secondary contact (Volga Basin) // Inland Water Biology. Vol. 14. P. 205-214. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1995082921020024

Artaev O.N., Ruchin A.B. 2016. Prussian and crucian carp: confindness to various types of waters and co-inhabiting species in water bodies within the Mid-Volga Region // Ecology, Environment and Conservation Paper. Vol. 22. Iss. 3. P. 1497-1502.

Artaev O.N., Ruchin A.B. 2017a. Fish population of the Moksha River basin. Saransk. 248 p. Artaev O.N., Ruchin A.B. 2017b. The ichthyofauna of the Moksha River, a tributary of the Volga river basin, Russia // Check List. Vol. 13(4). P. 185-202. https://doi.org/10.15560/13A185

Artaev O., Ruchin A., Ivanchev V., Ivancheva E., Sarychev V., Moreva O., Mikheev V., Medvedev D., Klevakin A. 2020. Fish occurrence in the middle Volga and upper Don regions (Russia) // Biodiversity Data Journal. Vol. 8. P. e54959. https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.8.e54959

Bashinskiy I.V. 2021. Beaver impact on water coverage of forest-steppe territories (Penza Region, European Russia) // Nature Conservation Research. Vol. 6(1). P. 88-97. https://dx.doi.org/10.24189/ncr.2021.016

Boznak E.I., Tereshchenko V.G., Zakharov A.B. 2020. Change in the state of an exploited fish population: From individual indicators to integral assessment // Biosystems Diversity. Vol. 28(4). P. 405-410. doi:10.15421/012052

Bryja J., Smith C., Konecny A., Reichard M. 2010. Range-wide population genetic structure of the European bitterling (Rhodeus amarus) based on microsatellite and mitochondrial DNA analysis // Molecular Ecology. Vol. 19. Iss. 21. P. 4708-4722. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2010.04844.x

Busarova O.Yu., Koval M.V., Esin E.V., Markevich G.N. 2019. Trophic segregation in mul-tispecies community of salmonids in the Penzhina River lower course (Kamchatsky Krai, Russia) // Nature Conservation Research. Vol. 4(2). P. 83-94. http://dx.doi.org/10.24189/ncr.2019.018

Casatti L., Langeani F., Ferreira C.P. 2006. Effects of physical habitat degradation on the stream fish assemblage structure in a pasture region // Environmental Management. Vol. 38. P. 974. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-005-0212-4

Chen G.Z., Qiu Y.P., Li L.P. 2017. Fish invasions and changes in the fish fauna of the Tarim Basin // Acta Ecol. Sin. Vol. 37. P. 700-714.

Corkum L.D., Sapota M.R., Skora K.E. 2004. The round goby, Neogobius melanostomus, a fish invader on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean // Biological Invasions. Vol. 6. P. 173-181.

Echevarría G., González N. 2018. Fish taxonomic and functional diversity in mesohabitats of the River Kakada, Caura National Park, Venezuela // Nature Conservation Research. Vol. 3(Suppl.2). P. 21-39. http://dx.doi.org/10.24189/ncr.2018.048

Eyckmans M., Celis N., Horemans N., Blust R., De Boeck, G. 2011. Exposure to waterborne copper reveals differences in oxidative stress response in three freshwater fish species // Aquat. Toxicol. Vol. 103. P. 112-120.

Glowacki L., Kruk A., Penczak T. 2021. Advancing improvement in riverine water quality caused a non-native fish species invasion and native fish fauna recovery // Scientific Reports. Vol. 11. P. 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-93751-2

Glowacki L., Penczak T. 2012. Large dam reservoirs are probably long-period oscillators of fish diversity // J. Fish Biol. Vol. 80. P. 2213-2235.

Gavrilo M.V., Martynova D.M. 2017. Conservation of rare species of marine flora and fauna of the Russian Arctic National Park, included in the Red Data Book of the Russian Federation and in the IUCN Red List // Nature Conservation Research. Vol. 2(Suppl. 1). P. 10-42. http://dx.doi.org/10.24189/ncr.2017.017

Fricke, R., Eschmeyer, W. N. & Van der Laan, R. (eds) 2021. Eschmeyer's catalog of fishes: genera, species, references.

(http://researcharchive.calacademy.org/research/ichthyology/catalog/fishcatmain.asp). Electronic version accessed 31.12.2021

Fuad M.H., Vetesník L., Simková A. 2021. Is gynogenetic reproduction in gibel carp (Carassius gibelio) a major trait responsible for invasiveness? // Journal of Vertebrate Biology. Vol. 70(4). P. 21049. https://doi.org/10.25225/jvb.21049

Kornis M. S., Mercado-Silva N., Vander Zanden M. J. 2012. Twenty years of invasion: a review of round goby Neogobius melanostomus biology, spread and ecological implications // Fish Biology. Vol. 80. Is. 2. P. 235-285. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.2011.03157.x

Kozhara A.V., Zhulidov A.V., Gollasch S., Przybylski M., Poznyak V.G., Zhulidov D.A., Gurtovaya T.Y. 2007. Range extension and conservation status of the bitterling, Rhodeus sericeus amarus in Russia and adjacent countries // Folia Zool. Vol. 56. P. 97-108.

Kuljanishvili T., Mumladze L., Japoshvili B., Mustafayev N., Ibrahimov S., Patoka J., Pipoyan S., Kalous L. 2021. The first unified inventory of non-native fishes of the South Caucasian countries, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia // Knowledge & Management of Aquatic Ecosystems. Vol. 422. P. 32. https://doi.org/10.1051/kmae/2021028

May R.M. 2002. The future of biological diversity in a crowded world // Current Science. Vol. 82. No. 11. P. 1325-1331.

Onorato D., Angus R.A., Marion K.R. 2000. Historical Changes in the Ichthyofaunal Assemblages of the Upper Cahaba River in Alabama Associated with Extensive Urban Development in the Watershed // Journal Freshwater Ecology. Vol. 15(1). P. 47-63. DOI: 10.1080/02705060.2000.9663721

Petsch D.K. 2016. Causes and consequences of biotic homogenization in freshwater ecosystems // Int. Rev. Hydrobiol. Vol. 101. P. 113-122.

Radocaj T., Spelic I., Vilizzi L., Povz M., Piria M. 2021. Identifying threats from introduced and translocated non-native freshwater fishes in Croatia and Slovenia under current and future climatic conditions // Global Ecology and Conservation. Vol. 27. P. e01520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2021.e01520

Ruchin A.B. Dynamics of the species diversity of Cyclostomata and fishes of Mordovia // Journal of Ichthyology. 2004. Vol. 44. Iss. 8. P. 569-574.

Ruchin A.B., Artaev O.N., Klevakin A.A., Moreva O.A., Osipov V.V., Levin B.A., Ilyin V.Yu., Mikheev V.A., Ermakov A.S., Yankin A.V., Vargot E.V., Alyushin I V. 2016. Fish population of the Sura River basin: species diversity, populations, distribution, protection. Saransk: MGU Publ. 272 p.

Ruchin A.B., Kozhara A.V., Levin B.A., Baklanov M.A., Zakharov V.Yu., Artaev O.N. 2007. On the distribution of riffle minnow Alburnoides bipunctatus (Cyprinidae) in the Volga Basin // Journal of Ichthyology. Vol. 47. No. 8. P. 631-638.

Ruchin A.B., Osipov V.V., Fayzulin A.I., Bakin O.V., Tselishcheva L.G., Bayanov N.G., 2019. Chinese sleeper (Perccottus glenii Dybowski, 1877) (Pisces, Odontobutidae) in the reserves and National Parks of the middle and lower Volga (Russia): mini-review // AACL Bioflux. Vol. 12(4). P. 1114-1124.

Ruchin A.B., Shlyakhtin G.V., Artaev O.N. 2009. Species composition and quantitative representation of fishes in biotopes with the riffle minnow Alburnoides bipunctatus // Russian Journal of Ecology. Vol. 40. Iss. 3. P. 194-198. DOI: 10.1134/S1067413609030084

Vetemaa M., Eschbaum R., Albert A., Saat T. 2005. Distribution, sex ratio and growth of Carassius gibelio (Bloch) in coastal and inland waters of Estonia (north-eastern Baltic Sea) // Applied Ichthyology. Vol. 21(4). P. 287-291. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0426.2005.00680.x

Zvezdin A.O., Polyakova N.V., Kucheryavyy A.V., Khokhryakov V.R., Kolotei A.V., Pavlov D.S. 2021. Discovery of Eudontomyzon sp. (Petromyzontidae) larvae in lakes and a characterisation of their habitats // Nature Conservation Research. Vol. 6(3). P. 73-86. https://dx.doi.org/10.24189/ncr.2021.039

К ИХТИОФАУНЕ НЕКОТОРЫХ РЕК БАССЕЙНА ВОЛГИ

А.Б. Ручин

Объединенная дирекция Мордовского государственного природного заповедника имени П.Г. Смидовича и национального парка «Смольный», Pоссия e-mail: [email protected]

Изменения в ихтиофауне рек происходят во многих странах и регионах. Это связано с самыми различными факторами и чаще является следствием антропогенных воздействий. Нами изучена ихтиофауна шести участков рек (по одной станции на каждой реке). В общей сложности было отловлено 2036 экземпляров. Идентифицировано 24 вида рыб из 11 семейств. Из них во всех реках отмечено 4 вида (Alburnus alburnus, Leuciscus leuciscus, Rutilus ruti-lus/lacustris, Squalius cephalus). В большинстве рек эти виды являлись доминирующими по численности. Выявлено два инвазионных вида - Perccottus glenii (река Теша) и Neogobius melanostomus (река Ока).

Ключевые слова: рыбы, биоразнообразие, Пензенская область, Нижегородская область, Республика Мордовия, Владимирская область