Environmental Management

, Volume 43, Issue 4, pp 682–697 | Cite as

Ecoregions in the Southern Balkans: Should Their Boundaries Be Revised?

  • Stamatis Zogaris
  • Alcibiades N. Economou
  • Panayotis Dimopoulos
Article

Abstract

Ecoregion delineations have gained increased attention in Europe, especially following the Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC (WFD), which provides the European Union’s first policy-relevant ecoregion map. However, the WFD’s ecoregions were created through a minor adaptation of Illies’ (Limnofauna Europaea. Gustav Fisher Verlag, Stuttgart, 1967/1978) freshwater zoogeographic regions, and the map’s specific boundaries have not been widely evaluated with respect to the WFD’s uses or their biogeographic accuracy. We examined the WFD ecoregion boundaries in Greece and its neighboring Balkan states by comparing them with the most prominent freshwater biogeographic boundaries as shown by riverine freshwater fish assemblages. Classification and ordination analyses of 23 river basin fish assemblages helped delineate natural faunal break boundaries in freshwater species assemblage distributions depicting major biogeographic barriers to aquatic biota dispersal. However, these biogeographic boundaries differ from those delineated in the WFD map, suggesting boundary errors and inconsistencies in the delineation method of the WFD ecoregions. We reviewed specific boundary disagreements and produced a map showing the region’s most prominent freshwater biogeographic boundaries by charting them on watershed borders among the four biotically dissimilar river basin groups in the southern Balkans. This regional evaluation reveals both a need to reconcile disparate approaches to ecoregion mapping and to promote the development of a new policy-relevant inland waters ecoregion framework that would support broad-scale water management and aquatic conservation.

Keywords

Ecoregions WFD Ichthyogeography Balkans Ecological assessment Conservation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was inspired and partially funded by the EU FAME project (EU 5th Framework Programme, contract no. EVK1-CT-2001-00094), and we are grateful to all members who provided assistance through discussions and suggestions, especially M.T. Ferreira, Y. Reyjol, and P. Angermeier, who provided advice at the early stages of this project. We particularly thank all colleagues at the Institute of Inland Waters (HCMR), who contributed in various ways to species compilation and data quality control. Furthermore, we are very grateful to D. Mdrak, A. Flloko, A. Apostolou, V. Pešić, G. Urbanič, D. Bobori, and A. Legakis, who provided important information on river basin biota in several Balkan countries. Finally, we thank R. Bjorkland, A. Vlamis-Gardikas, N. Mandrak, J. Manolis, Y. Chatzinikolaou, L. Vardakas, V. Tachos, S. Soldovieri, A.S. Kallimanis, and four anonymous reviewers for constructive comments and assistance with drafts of this manuscript.

References

  1. Achleitner S, Toffol S, Engelhard C, Rauch W (2005) The European Water Framework Directive: water quality classification and implications to engineering planning. Environmental Management 35:517–525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abell R, Olson D, Dinerstein E, Hurley P, Diggs JT, Eichbaum W, Walters S, Wettengel S, Allnutt T, Loucks C, Hedao P (2000) Freshwater ecoregions of North America: a conservation assessment. Island Press, Washington, DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  3. Abell R, Thieme M, Dinerstein E, Olson D (2002) A sourcebook for conducting biological assessments and developing biodiversity visions for ecoregion conservation. Volume II: freshwater ecoregions. World Wildlife Fund, Washington, DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  4. Abell R et al (2008) Freshwater ecoregions of the world: a new map of biogeographic units for freshwater biodiversity conservation. BioScience 58:403–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Alvarez-Cobelas M, Rojo C, Angeller DG (2005) Mediterranean limnology: current status, gaps and the future. Journal of Limnology 64(1):13–29Google Scholar
  6. Bailey RG (1983) Delineation of ecosystem regions. Environmental Management 7:365–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bailey RG (1987) Suggested hierarchy of criteria for multi-scale ecosystem mapping. Landscape and Urban Planning 14:313–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bailey RG (2005) Identifying ecoregion boundaries. Environmental Management 34:14–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bănărescu PM (2004) Distribution pattern of the aquatic fauna of the Balkan Peninsula. In: Griffiths HI, Kryštufek B, Reed JM (eds) Balkan biodiversity: pattern and process in the European hotspot. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 203–217Google Scholar
  10. Bianco PG (1986) The zoogeographic units of Italy and Western Balkans based on cyprinid species ranges (Pisces). Biologia Gallo-Hellenica 12:291–299Google Scholar
  11. Bianco PG, Ahnelt H, Economidis PS (1996) The freshwater fish from eastern and large Mediterranean islands with comments on their safety status. Acta Universitalis Carolinae 40:45–60Google Scholar
  12. Bobori DC, Economidis PS (2006) Freshwater fishes of Greece: their biodiversity, fisheries and habitats. Aquatic Ecosystem Health & Management 9:407–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bonada N, Zamora-Muñoz C, Rieradevall M, Prat N (2005) Ecological and historical filters constraining spatial caddisfly distribution in Mediterranean rivers. Freshwater Biology 50:781–797CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Briggs JC (1995) Global biogeography. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  15. Bryer M, Braun D, Khoury M, Higgins J (2005) Focusing freshwater conservation efforts. In: Silk N, Ciruna K (eds) A practitioner’s guide to freshwater biodiversity conservation. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp 37–58Google Scholar
  16. Clarke KR, Warwick RM (1994) Change in marine communities: an approach to statistical analysis and interpretation. Natural Environment Research Council, UKGoogle Scholar
  17. Davis PH (1965) Flora of Turkey and the east Aegean Islands, vol 1. Edinburgh University Press, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
  18. Davy-Bowker J, Clarke RT, Johnson RK, Kokes J, Murphy JF, Zahrádková S (2006) A comparison of the European Water Framework Directive physical typology and RIVPACS-type models as alternative methods of establishing reference conditions for benthic macroinvertebrates. Hydrobiologia 566:91–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dermitzakis MD, Papanikolaou D (1981) Paleogeography and geodynamics of the Aegean region during the Neogene. Annales Geologiques de Pays Helleniques 4:245–289Google Scholar
  20. DMEER—Digital Map of European Ecological Regions Project (2000) The Digital Map of European Ecological Regions (DMEER). European Topic Centre on Nature Conservation, Muséum d’Histoire Naturelle, ParisGoogle Scholar
  21. Dobkins I, Rippey B, Harrington TJ, Bradley C, Ni Chathain B, Kelly-Quinn M, McGarringle M, Hodge S, Trigg D (2005) Developing an optimal river typology for biological elements within the Water Framework Directive. Water Research 39:3479–3486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Economidis PS, Bănărescu PM (1991) The distribution and origins of freshwater fishes in the Balkan peninsula, especially in Greece. Internationale Revue der gesamten Hydrobiologie und Hydrographie 76:257–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Economou AN, Zogaris S, Giakoumi S, Barbieri R, Petridis D (2003) Developing a biotic river typology and defining reference conditions in the rivers of Greece: a spatially-based approach. EESD Project: Development, Evaluation & Implementation of a Standardized Fish-based Assessment Method for the Ecological Status of European Rivers (FAME). Work Package 6, 35 pp. Available at http://fame.boku.ac.at/downloads/D9_13_SBM_Reports/ecoregion_6_SBA_Economou_etal.pdf
  24. Economou AN, Giakoumi S, Vardakas L, Barbieri R, Stoumboudi M, Zogaris S (2007) The freshwater ichthyofauna of Greece: an update based on a hydrographic basin survey. Mediterranean Marine Science 8(1):91–168Google Scholar
  25. EEA (European Environment Agency) (2007) Europe’s Environment: The Fourth Assessment (Belgrade). European Environment Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark. Available at: http://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/regions/pan-european/fourth-assessment
  26. European Commission (2000) Directive 2000/60/EC, Establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. Official Journal of the European Communities L 327:1–71Google Scholar
  27. Fattorini S (2002) Biogeography of the tenebrionid beetles (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae) on the Aegean Islands (Greece). Journal of Biogeography 29:49–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ferreira T, Oliveira J, Caiola N, de Sostoa A, Casals F, Cortes R, Economou A, Zogaris S, Garcia-Jalon D, Ilhéu M, Martinez-Capel F, Pont D, Rogers C, Prenda J (2007) Ecological traits of fish assemblages from Mediterranean Europe and their responses to human disturbance. Fisheries Management and Ecology 14:473–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gasc JP (ed) (1997) Atlas of amphibians and reptiles in Europe. Societas Europaea Hepretological and Muséum d’Histoire Naturelle, ParisGoogle Scholar
  30. Gasith A, Resh VH (1999) Streams in Mediterranean climate regions- abiotic influences and biotic responses to predictable seasonal events. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 30:51–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gerritsen J, Barbour MT, King K (2000) Apples, oranges, and ecoregions: on determining pattern in aquatic assemblages. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 19(3):487–496Google Scholar
  32. Gilbert CR (1980) Zoogeographic factors in relation to biological monitoring of fish. In: Hocutt CH, Stauffer JR (eds) Biological monitoring of fish. Lexingthon Books, Lexington, USA, pp 309–339Google Scholar
  33. Gordon ND, McMahon TA, Finlayson BL, Gipple CJ, Nathan RJ (2004) Stream hydrology: an introduction for ecologists, 2nd edn. John Wiley & SonsGoogle Scholar
  34. Griffiths D (2006) Pattern and process in the ecological biogeography of European freshwater fish. Journal of Animal Ecology 75:734–751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Groves C (2003) Drafting a conservation blueprint: a practitioner’s guide to planning for biodiversity. Island Press, Washington, DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  36. Hatton-Ellis T (2008) The Hitchhiker’s guide to the water framework directive. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 18:111–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hausdorf B, Hennig C (2005) The influence of recent geography, palaeogeography and climate on the composition of the fauna of the central Aegean Islands. Biological Journal of the Linnaean Society 84:785–795CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hawkins CP, Norris RH, Gerritsen J, Hughes RM, Jackson SK, Johnson RK, Stevenson RJ (2000) Evaluation of the use of landscape classifications for the prediction of freshwater biota: synthesis and recommendations. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 19(3):541–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Heino J (2001) Regional gradient analysis of freshwater biota: do similar biogeographic patterns exist among multiple taxonomic groups. Journal of Biogeography 28:69–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Higgins JV, Bryer MT, Khoury ML, Fitzhugh TW (2005) A freshwater classification approach for biodiversity conservation planning. Conservation Biology 19:432–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hoagstrom CW, Berry CR (2006) Island biogeography of native fish faunas among Great Plains drainage basins: basin scale features influence composition. American Fisheries Society Symposium 48:221–264Google Scholar
  42. Hughes SJ, Malmqvist B (2006) Atlantic island freshwater ecosystems: challenges and considerations following the EU Water Framework Directive. Hydrobiologia 544:289–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Hugueny B (1989) West African rivers as biogeographic islands: species richness of fish communities. Oecologia 79:236–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Illies J (1967/1978) Limnofauna Europaea. Gustav Fisher Verlag, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  45. Irvine K (2004) Classifying ecological status under the European Water Fremework Directive: the need for monitoring to account for natural variability. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 14:107–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Jepson P, Whittaker RJ (2002) Ecoregions in context: a critique with special reference to Indonesia. Conservation Biology 16:42–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Klijn F, Udo de Haes HA (1994) A hierarchical approach to ecosystems and its implications for ecological land classification. Landscape Ecology 9:89–104Google Scholar
  48. Kottelat M, Freyhof J (2007) Handbook of European freshwater fishes. Publications Kottelat, Cornol and BerlinGoogle Scholar
  49. Kruskal JB (1964) Nonmetric multidimensional scaling: a numerical method. Psychometrika 29:115–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Larsen DP, Omernik JM, Hughes RM, Rohm CM, Whitier TR, Kinney AJ, Gallant AL, Dudley DR (1986) Correspondence between spatial patterns in fish assemblages in Ohio streams and aquatic ecoregions. Environmental Management 10(6):815–828CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lévêque C, Oberdorff T, Paugy D, Stiassny MLJ, Tedesco PA (2008) Global diversity of fish (Pisces) in freshwater. Hydrobiologia 595:545–567Google Scholar
  52. Logan P, Furse M (2002) Preparing for the European Water Framework Directive-making the links between habitat and aquatic biota. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 12:425–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. McDonald R, McKnight M, Weiss D, Selig E, O’Connor M, Violin C, Moody A (2005) Species compositional similarity and ecoregions: Do ecoregion boundaries represent zones of high species turnover? Biological Conservation 126:24–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. McMahon G, Gregonis SM, Waltman SW, Omernik JM, Thorson TD, Freeouf JA, Rorick AH, Keys JE (2001) Developing a spatial framework of common ecological regions for the conterminous United States. Environmental Management 28(3):293–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. McMahon G, Wiken EB, Gauthier DA (2004) Towards a scientifically rigorous basis for developing mapped ecological regions. Environmental Management 34:111–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Maurakis EG, Pritchard MK, Economidis PS (2000) Historical relationships of mainland river drainages in Greece. BIOS 6:109–124Google Scholar
  57. Mavrommatis GN (1980) The bioclimate of Greece: relationships between climate and vegetation—bioclimatic maps. Institute for Forestry Research, Athens (In Greek)Google Scholar
  58. Mesibov R (1994) Faunal breaks in Tasmania and their significance for invertebrate conservation. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 36:133–136Google Scholar
  59. Moog O, Schmidt-Kloiber A, Ofenböck T, Gerritsen J (2004) Does the ecoregion approach support the typological demands of the EU ‘Water Framework Directive’. Hydrobiologia 516:21–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Munné A, Prat N (2004) Defining river types in a Mediterranean area: a methodology for the implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive. Environmental Management 33:1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Noble R, Cowx I (2002) Development of a river-type classification system (D1). EESD Project: Development, Evaluation & Implementation of a Standardized Fish-based Assessment Method for the Ecological Status of European Rivers (FAME). Final Report, http://fame.boku.ac.at/downloads/D1_2_typology_and%20species_classification.pdf
  62. Oberdorff T, Hugueny B, Guégan JF (1997) Evidence of historical effects on freshwater fish species diversity: comparison between Europe and North America. Journal of Biogeography 24:461–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Olson DM, Dinerstein E, Wikramanayake ED, Burgess ND, Powell GVN, Underwood EC, D’Amico JA, Itoua I, Strand HE, Morrison JC, Loucks CJ, Allnutt TF, Ricketts TH, Kura Y, Lamoreux JF, Wettengel WW, Hedao P, Kassem KR (2001) Terrestrial ecoregions of the world: a new map of life on Earth. BioScience 51:933–938CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Omernik JM (1987) Ecoregions of the Conterminous United States. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 77(1):118–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Omernik JM (2004) Perspectives on the nature and definition of ecological regions. Environmental Management 34:27–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Omernik JM, Bailey R (1997) Distinguishing between watersheds and ecoregions. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 33:935–949CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Perissoratis C, Conispoliatis N (2003) The impacts of sea-level changes during latest Pleistocene and Holocene times on the morphology of the Ionian and Aegean Seas (SE Alpine Europe). Marine Geology 196:145–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Poff NL (1997) Landscape filters and species traits: towards mechanistic understanding and prediction in stream ecology. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 16(2):391–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Pont D, Hugueny B, Beier U, Goffaux D, Melcher A, Noble R, Rogers C, Roset N, Schmutz S (2006) Assessing river biotic condition at a continental scale: a European approach using functional metrics and fish assemblages. Journal of Applied Ecology 43:70–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Radoman P (1985) Hydrobioidea, a superfamily of Prosobranchia (Gastropoda) II. Origin, zoogeography, evolution in the Balkans and Asia Minor, Monograph 1. Institute of Zoology, BeogradGoogle Scholar
  71. Reyjol Y, Hugueny B, Pont D, Bianco PG, Beier U, Caiola N, Casals F, Cowx I, Economou AN, Ferreira T, Haidvogl G, Noble R, de Sostoa A, Vigneron T, Virbickas T (2007) Patterns in species richness and endemism of European freshwater fish. Global Ecology and Biogeography 16:65–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Reyjol Y, Huguen B, Bianco PG, Pont D (2008) Congruence between riverine fish species richness and endemism at the biogeographical scale: the role of history. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems. doi:10.1002/aqc
  73. Ricklefs RE (1987) Community Diversity: Relative Roles of Local and Regional Processes. Science 235:167–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Schmidt-Kloiber A, Moog O, Gerritsen J (2001) Die aquatisschen Ökoregionen Österreichs–Ergebnisse multivariater Analysen von Makrozoobenthos-Zönosen. Österreichs Fischerei 54:154–161Google Scholar
  75. Schmitt T (2007) Molecular biogeography of Europe: pleistocene cycles and postglacial trends. Frontiers in Zoology 4:11. doi:10.1186/1742-9994-4-11
  76. Schmutz S, Cowx IG, Haidvogl G, Pont D (2007) Fish-based methods for assessing European running waters: a synthesis. Fisheries Management and Ecology 14:369–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Skoulikidis NTh, Karaouzas I, Gritzalis KC (2008) Identifying key environmental variables structuring benthic fauna for establishing a biotic typology for Greek running waters. Limnologica. doi:10.1016/j.limno.2008.01.002
  78. Smith KG, Darwall WRT (eds) (2006) The status and distribution of freshwater fish endemic to the Mediterranean Basin. IUCN, Gland and CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  79. Smogor RA, Angermeier PL (2001) Determining a regional framework for assessing biotic integrity of Virginia streams. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 130:18–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Sowa SP, Annis G, Morey ME, Diamond DD (2007) A gap analysis and comprehensive conservation strategy for riverine ecosystems of Missouri. Ecological Monographs 77:301–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Strid A, Tan K (1997) Flora Hellenica, vol 1, Koeltz. University of Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  82. Thieme ML, Abell RA, Stiassny MLJ, Skelton PH, Lehner B, Teugels GG, Dinerstein E, Kamdem Toham A, Burgess N, Olson DM (2005) Freshwater ecoregions of Africa: a conservation assessment. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  83. Thieme M, Lehner B, Abell R, Hamilton SK, Kellndorfer J, Powell G, Riveros JC (2007) Freshwater conservation planning in data-poor areas: an example from a remote Amazonian basin (Madre de Dios River, Peru and Bolivia). Biological Conservation 135:484–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Tselepedakis IG, Theoharatos GA (1989) A bioclimatic classification of the Greek area. Theoretical and Applied Climatology 40:147–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Eren T, Koop K (2008) Multi-attribute ecological river typology for assessing ecological condition and conservation planning. Hydrobiologia 603:83–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Vargas JM, Real R, Guerrero JC (1998) Biogeographical regions of the Iberian peninsula based on freshwater fish and amphibian distributions. Ecography 21:371–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Verdonschot PFM (2006) Evaluation of the use of Water Framework Directive typology descriptors, reference sites, and spatial scale in macroinvertebrate stream typology. Hydrobiologia 566:39–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Verdonschot PFM, Nijboer RC (2004) Testing the European stream typology of the Water Framework Directive for macroinvertebrates. Hydrobiologia 516:35–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Urbanič G, Toman MJ (2007) Influence of environmental variables on stream caddis larvae in three Slovenian Ecoregions: Alps, Dinaric Western Balkans and Pannonian Lowland. International Review of Hydrobiology 92:582–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Wasson JG, Chandesris A, Pella H (2002) Définition des hydro-écorégions de France métropolitaine. Approche régionale de typologie des eaux courantes et éléments pour la définition de peuplements de référence d’invertébrés. Cemegref Technical report, LyonGoogle Scholar
  91. Wikramanayake E, Dinerstein E, Loucks C, Olson D, Morrison J, Lamoreux J, McKnight M, Hedao P (2001) Ecoregions in ascendence: reply to Jepson and Whittaker. Conservation Biology 16Google Scholar
  92. Zardoya R, Economidis PS, Doadrio I (1999) Phylogenetic relationships of Greek Cyprinidae: molecular evidence for at least two origins of the Greek cyprinid fauna. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 13(1):122–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stamatis Zogaris
    • 1
    • 2
  • Alcibiades N. Economou
    • 1
  • Panayotis Dimopoulos
    • 2
  1. 1.Hellenic Center for Marine Research, Institute of Inland WatersAnavissosGreece
  2. 2.Laboratory of Ecology and Biodiversity Conservation, Department of Environmental and Natural Resources ManagementUniversity of IoanninaAgrinioGreece

Personalised recommendations