Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Our everyday pollution: Are rural streams really more conserved than urban streams?

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Aquatic Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

Due to the higher anthropogenic impacts, streams from urban regions are expected to suffer more damage than those from rural regions. This study investigated whether environmental changes caused by human activities negatively affect the variability in ecomorphological and dietary characteristics of the ichthyofauna from ten streams (five urban and five rural). Contrary to expectations, ecomorphological characteristics and diet from the fish assemblage did not differ between urban and rural streams, even though urban streams tended to present smaller variability in traits and diet than rural ones. Human activities, though with different origins, have been negatively affecting both streams types, resulting in similar structure of the fish assemblages, that is, artificial structures, blocks, salinity, and total solids have directly influenced the ecomorphology of the fish assemblage, compromising adaptability, in view of the ichthyofauna's sensibilities for the physicochemical variables. These results reinforce the need to develop environmental management efforts to preserve and conserve stream ecosystems improving their quality, especially in degraded areas.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank B. A. Quirino, J. P. A. Pagotto, K. Winemiller, R. Fugi, R. L. Delariva for assistance and insights and F. List for corrections in the English. Nupélia (UEM) for its infrastructure and logistic support. TDG and CMM were supported by Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) and LS by PDE-CAPES (Proc. 88881.170373/ 2018-01).

Funding

The research was funded by CAPES (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

TDG, CMM, and EG designed the study; LS, and TDG analyzed the data; TDG led the manuscript writing and all of the authors contributed with ideas and writing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thiago Deruza Garcia.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Garcia, T.D., Strictar, L., Muniz, C.M. et al. Our everyday pollution: Are rural streams really more conserved than urban streams?. Aquat Sci 83, 47 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00027-021-00798-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00027-021-00798-4

Keywords

Navigation