, Volume 623, Issue 1, pp 127–140 | Cite as

Identifying priority sites for the conservation of freshwater fish biodiversity in a Mediterranean basin with a high degree of threatened endemics

Primary research paper


The Guadiana River basin’s freshwater fish species richness, endemicity and threatened status (92% of native species are threatened) highlight the need for a large-scale study to identify priority areas for their conservation. One of the most common problems in conservation planning is the assessment of a site’s relative value for the conservation of regional biodiversity. Here we used a two-tiered approach, which integrates an assessment of biodiversity loss and the evaluation of conservation value through site-specific measures. These measures based on the reference condition approach introduce the ability to make objective comparisons throughout the Guadiana River basin, thus avoiding a priori target areas. We identified a set of biodiversity priority areas of special conservation significance—which contain rare taxa as well as intact fish communities—because of their outstanding contribution to the basin’s biodiversity. The inclusion of complete sub-basins in these priority areas might guarantee an optimal solution in terms of spatial aggregation and connectivity. However, the high spatial fragmentation to which the Guadiana River basin is submitted due to river regulation highlights the necessity of a systematic approach to evaluate the capability of the identified priority areas to maintain the Guadiana’s freshwater fish biodiversity.


Guadiana River basin Freshwater fish Priority areas Conservation 


  1. Abell, R., 2002. Conservation biology for the biodiversity crisis: a freshwater follow-up. Conservation Biology 16: 1435–1437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allan, J. D. & A. S. Flecker, 1993. Biodiversity conservation in running waters. Identifying the major factors that threaten destruction of riverine species and ecosystems. BioScience 43: 32–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Angermeier, P. L., 2000. The natural imperative for biological conservation. Conservation Biology 14: 373–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Clavero, M., F. Blanco-Garrido & J. Prenda, 2004. Fish Fauna in Iberian Mediterranean basins: biodiversity, introduced species and damming impacts. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 14: 575–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Collares-Pereira, M. J. & I. G. Cowx, 2004. The role of catchment scale environmental management in freshwater fish conservation. Fisheries Management and Ecology 11: 303–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cowling, R. M., R. L. Pressey, M. Rouget & A. T. Lombard, 2003. A conservation plan for a global biodiversity hotspot—the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa. Biological Conservation 112: 191–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Darwall, W. R. T. & J.-C. Vié, 2005. Identifying important sites for conservation of freshwater biodiversity: extending the species-based approach. Fisheries Management and Ecology 12: 287–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Doadrio, I., 1988. Delimitation of areas in the Iberian Peninsula on the basis of freshwater fishes. Booner Zoolische Beiträge 39: 113–128.Google Scholar
  9. Doadrio, I. (ed.), 2002. Atlas y Libro rojo de los peces continentales de España. Dirección General de Conservación de la Naturaleza, Ministerio de Medio Ambiente. Segunda Ed.Google Scholar
  10. Eken, G., L. Bennun, T. M. Brooks, W. Darwall, L. D. C. Fishpool, M. Foster, D. Knox, P. Langhammer, P. Matiku, E. Radford, P. Salaman, W. Sechrest, M. L. Smith, S. Spector & A. Tordoff, 2004. Key biodiversity areas as site conservation targets. BioScience 54: 1110–1118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Elith, J., C. H. Graham, R. P. Anderson, M. Didík, S. Ferrier, A. Guisan, R. J. Hijmans, F. Huettmann, R. J. Leathwick, J. Li, L. G. Lohmann, B. A. Loiselle, G. Manion, C. Moritz, M. Nakamura, Y. Nakazawa, J. Mc. C. Overton, A. T. Peterson, S. J. Phillips, K. Richardson, R. Scachetti-Pereira, R. E. Schapire, J. Soberón, S. Williams, M. S. Wisz & N. E. Zimmermann, 2006. Novel methods improve predictions of species distributions from occurrence data. Ecography 29: 129–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fielding, A. H. & J. F. Bell, 1997. A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models. Environmental Conservation 24: 38–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Filipe, A. F., T. A. Marques, S. Seabra, P. Tiago, F. Ribeiro, L. Moreira Da Costa, I. G. Cowx & M. J. Collares-Pereira, 2004. Selection of priority areas for fish conservation in Guadiana River Basin, Iberian Peninsula. Conservation Biology 18: 189–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gasith, A. & V. H. Resh, 1999. Streams in Mediterranean climate regions: abiotic influences and biotic responses to predictable seasonal events. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 30: 51–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hosmer, D. W. Jr. & S. Lemeshow, 1989. Applied Logistic Regression. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  16. Jolliffe, T., 1986. Principal Component Analysis. Springer-Verlag, New York.Google Scholar
  17. Kennard, M. J., B. D. Harch, B. J. Pusey & A. H. Arthington, 2006. Accurately defining the reference condition for summary biotic metrics: a comparison of four approaches. Hydrobiologia 572: 151–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Knight, R. L., 1999. Private lands: the neglected geography. Conservation Biology 13: 223–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Knight, A. T., R. J. Smith, R. M. Cowling, P. G. Desmet, D. P. Faith, S. Ferrier, C. M. Gelderblom, H. Grantham, A. T. Lombard, K. Maze, J. L. Nel, J. D. Parrish, G. Q. K. Pence, H. P. Possingham, B. Reyers, M. Ruoget, D. Roux & K. A. Wilson, 2007. Improving the key biodiversity areas approach for effective conservation planning. Bioscience 57: 256–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Koster, W. M. & D. A. Crook, 2008. Diurnal and nocturnal movements of river blackfish (Gadopsis marmoratus) in a south-eastern Australian upland stream. Ecology of Freshwater Fish 17: 146–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lindermayer, D. B., C. R. Margules & D. B. Botkin, 2000. Indicators of biodiversity for ecologically sustainable forest management. Conservation Biology 4: 941–950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Linke, S. & R. H. Norris, 2003. Biodiversity: bridging the gap between condition and conservation. Hydrobiologia 500: 203–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Linke, S., R. H. Norris, D. P. Faith & D. Stockwell, 2005. ANNA: a new prediction method for bioassessment programs. Freshwater Biology 50: 147–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Linke, S., R. L. Pressey, R. C. Bailey & R. H. Norris, 2007. Management options for river conservation planning: condition and conservation re-visited. Freshwater Biology 52: 918–938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Magalhães, M. F., D. C. Batalha & M. J. Collares-Pereira, 2002. Gradients in stream fish assemblages across a Mediterranean landscape: contributions of environmental factors and spatial structure. Freshwater Biology 47: 1015–1031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Malmqvist, B. & S. R. Rundle, 2002. Threats to the running water ecosystems of the world. Environmental Conservation 29: 134–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Manel, S., H. C. Williams & S. J. Ormerod, 2001. Evaluating presence-absence models in ecology: the need to account for prevalence. Journal of Applied Ecology 38: 921–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Margules, C. R. & R. L. Pressey, 2000. Systematic conservation planning. Nature 405: 243–253.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Margules, C. R., R. L. Pressey & P. H. Williams, 2002. Representing biodiversity: data and procedures for identifying priority areas for conservation. Journal of Bioscience 27: 309–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Matthews, W. J. & J. T. Styron, 1982. Tolerance of headwaters vs mainstream fishes for abrupt physicochemical changes. American Midland Naturalist 105: 149–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Meffe, G. K., 2002. Connecting science to management and policy in freshwater fish conservation. In Collares-Pereira, M. J., I. G. Cowx & M. M. Coelho (eds), Conservation of Freshwater Fishes: Options for the Future. Fishing New Books, Blackwell Science, Oxford, UK: 186–197.Google Scholar
  32. Ministerio de Medio Ambiente, 2005. Análisis de las características de las demarcaciones. Caracterización de los tipos de ríos y lagos, June 2005.Google Scholar
  33. Mugodo, J., M. Kennard, P. Liston, S. Nichols, S. Linke, R. Norris & M. Lintermans, 2006. Local stream habitat variables predicted from catchment scale characteristics are useful for predicting fish distribution. Hydrobiologia 572: 59–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Munne, A., N. Prat, C. Sola, N. Bonada & M. Rieradevall, 2003. A simple field method for assessing the ecological quality of riparian habitat in rivers and streams: QBR index. Aquatic Conservation-Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 13: 147–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ninyerola, M., X. Pons & J. M. Roure, 2005. Atlas Climático Digital de la Península Ibérica. Metodología y aplicaciones en bioclimatología y geobotánica. Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra. ISBN 932860-8-7.Google Scholar
  36. Oberdorff, T., D. Pont, B. Hugueny & D. Chessel, 2001. A probabilistic model characterizing fish assemblages of French rivers: a framework for environmental assessment. Freshwater Biology 46: 399–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pont, D., B. Hugueny, N. Roset, & C. Rogers, 2004. Analysing Reference Conditions and Assessing degraded Conditions. WP6-WP7, in Development, Evaluation & Implementation of a Standardised Fish-Based Assessment Method for the Ecological Status of European Rivers—A Contribution to the Water Framework Directive (FAME). Available at http://fame.boku.ac.at.
  38. Possingham, H. P., I. R. Ball & S. Andelman, 2000. Mathematical methods for identifying representative reserve networks. In Ferson, S. & M. Burgman (eds), Quantitative Methods for Conservation Biology. Springer-Verlag, New York: 291–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Prenda, J., M. Clavero, F. Blanco-Garrido, A. Menor & V. Hermoso, 2006. Threats to the conservation to of biotic integrity in Iberian fluvial ecosystems. Linmnetica 25: 377–388.Google Scholar
  40. Pressey, R. L., 1994. Ad hoc reservations: forward or barckward steps in developing representative reserve systems? Conservation Biology 8: 662–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Revenga, C. & G. Mock, 2000. Freshwater biodiversity in crisis. Earth Trends World Resources Institute: 1–4. (http://earthtrends.wri.org).
  42. Reynoldson, T. B., R. H. Norris, V. H. Resh, K. E. Day & D. M. Rosenberg, 1997. The reference condition: a comparison of multimetric and multivariate approaches to assess water-quality impairment using benthic macroinvertebrates. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 16: 833–852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Root, K. V., H. R. Akçacaya & L. Ginzburg, 2003. A multispecies approach to ecological evaluation and Conservation. Conservation Biology 17: 196–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Ross, S. T., W. J. Matthews & A. A. Echelle, 1985. Persistence of stream fish assemblages—effects of environmental change. American Naturalist 126: 24–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Saunders, D. L., J. J. Meeuwing & C. J. Vincent, 2002. Freshwater protected areas: strategies for conservation. Conservation Biology 16: 30–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schlosser, I. J., 1995. Critical landscape attributes that influence fish population dynamics in headwater streams. Hydrobiologia 303: 71–81.Google Scholar
  47. Simpson, J. C. & R. H. Norris, 2000. Biological assessment of river quality: development of AUSRIVAS models and outputs. In Wright, J. F., D. W. Sutcliffe & M. T. Furse (eds), Assessing the Biological Quality of Fresh Waters; RIVPACS and Other Techniques. Freshwater Biological Association, Ambleside, Cumbria, UK: 125–142.Google Scholar
  48. Smith, K. G. & W. R. T. Darwall (eds), 2006. The Status and Distribution of Freshwater Fish Endemic to the Mediterranean Basin. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK: v+34 pp.Google Scholar
  49. Swets, J. A., 1988. Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science 240: 1285–1293.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Van Sickle, J., C. P. Hawkins, D. P. Larsen & A. T. Herlihy, 2005. A null model for the expected macroinvertebrate assemblage in streams. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 24: 178–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Vannote, R. L., G. W. Minshall, K. W. Cummins, J. R. Sedell & C. E. Cushing, 1980. River continuum concept. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Sciences 37: 130–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wright, J. F., 1995. Development and use of a system for predicting the macroinvertebrate fauna in flowing waters. Australian Journal of Ecology 20: 181–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departamento de Biología Ambiental y Salud PúblicaUniversidad de HuelvaHuelvaSpain
  2. 2.The Ecology Centre, School of Integrative BiologyUniversity of QueenslandSt LuciaAustralia

Personalised recommendations