Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Trophic fingerprinting of a pristine but rapidly deteriorating downstream region of a Western Ghats River

  • Research
  • Published:
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Chalakudy River is renowned for its pristine waters and rich ichthyofaunal biodiversity. The downstream area of the river is confronting a series of risks, including pollution, saline water ingression, sand mining, illegal and intensified fishing practices, and invasion of exotic and alien species. A mass balanced ecosystem model was constructed for the downstream region of Chalakudy River (DCR) using Ecopath with Ecosim (EWE), incorporating 12 functional groups to delineate the food web and network flow indices for the period 2020 to 2021. The trophic level (TL) of the ecosystem network ranged from TL-1 (detritus) to TL-3.4 (birds). High fishing pressure is one possible cause for the high ecotrophic efficiency values as evidenced by the fish groups. Both the grazing food chain and detritus food chain (detritivory: herbivory ratio 0.94) contributed more or less equal to the energy transfer between TL. Network analysis of the model indicated a mean transfer efficiency of 12%, with shares from primary producers (14%) and detritus (11%). A mixed trophic impact analysis demonstrated a strong positive impact of primary producers and detritus groups on most of the other ecological groups at higher trophic levels. The DCR model showed a high system throughput (32,464.7 t km−2 year−1), low system omnivory (0.09), low connectance index (0.36), low Finn’s cycling index (4.9), and mean path length (2.8), low relative ascendency (37.5%), and high system overhead (62.5%). These indices propound that DCR is an immature and developing ecosystem with moderate strength in reserve to resist external perturbations.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this article. Data shall be made available upon reasonable request.

References

  • Allen, K. R. (1971). Relation between production and biomass. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 28, 1573–1581.

  • Angelini, R., & Agostinho, A. A. (2005). Food web model of the Upper Paraná River Floodplain: description and aggregation effects. Ecological Modelling, 181(2-3), 109–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angelini, R., Aloísio, G. R., & Carvalho, A. R. (2010). Mixed food web control and stability in a Cerrado river. Aquatic Science, 5, 421–431.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aravindan, C. M. (1993). Preliminary trophic model of Veli Lake, southern India. In V. Christensen & D. Pauly (Eds.), Trophic models of aquatic ecosystems (pp. 87–89). ICLARM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bachan, A. K. H. (2003). Riparian vegetation along the middle and lower zones of the Chalakudy River, Kerala, Report. In Project 26/2000. Kerala research program on local level development. Center for Development Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, M., Mukherjee, J., Banerjee, A., Roy, M., Bandyopdhyay, G., & Ray, S. (2015). Impact of environmental factors on maintaining water quality of Bakreswar reservoir, India. Computational Ecology and Software, 5, 239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Behera, P. R., Parida, P. K., Karna, S. K., Raman, R. K., Suresh, V. R., Behera, B. K., & Das, B. K. (2020). Trophic fingerprinting of Chilika, a Ramsar site and the largest lagoon of Asia using Ecopath. Regional Studies in Marine Science, 37, 101328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bijukumar, A., Regi, S. R., & Smrithi, R. (2015). Trophic structure, interactions and ecosystem attributes of Vellayani Lake, Kerala, India, with special reference to fisheries. Journal of Aquatic Biology & Fisheries, 3, 63–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, V. (1995). Ecosystem maturity—Towards quantification. Ecological Modelling, 77(1), 3–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, V., & Pauly, D. (1992). ECOPATH II—A software for balancing steady-state ecosystem models and calculating network characteristics. Ecological Modelling, 61(3-4), 169–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, V., & Pauly, D. (1993). Trophic models of aquatic ecosystems. ICLARM Conference Proceedings, 26, 390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, V., & Pauly, D. (1995). Fish production, catches and the carrying capacity of the world oceans. NAGA, 18(3), 34–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, V., & Walters, C. J. (2004). Ecopath with Ecosim: methods, capabilities and limitations. Ecological Modelling, 172(2-4), 109-139.

  • Christensen, V., Walters, C. J., & Pauly, D. (2005). Ecopath with Ecosim: A user’s guide (Vol. 154, p. 31). Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coll, M., Palomera, I., Tudela, S., & Dowd, M. (2008). Food-web dynamics in the South Catalan Sea ecosystem for 1978–2003. Ecological Modelling, 217(1-2), 95–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colléter, M., Valls, A., Guitton, J., Gascuel, D., Pauly, D., & Christensen, V. (2015). Global overview of the applications of the Ecopath with Ecosim modeling approach using the EcoBase models repository. Ecological Modelling, 302, 42–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colléter, M., Valls, A.E., Guitton, J., Morissette, L., Arreguín-Sánchez, F.F., Christensen, V., Gascuel, D., & Pauly, D. (2013). EcoBase: a repository solution to gather and communicate information from EwE models.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Mutsert, K., Lewis, K., Milroy, S., Buszowski, J., & Steenbeek, J. (2017). Using ecosystem modeling to evaluate trade-offs in coastal management: Effects of large-scale river diversions on fish and fisheries. Ecological Modelling, 360, 14–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Divya, A. H. (2019). Assessment and modeling of pollution load in Chalakudy river Kerala India. Doctoral dissertation, Government Engineering College Thrissur University of Calicut Kerala.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dudgeon, D. (2013). Anthropocene extinctions: global threats to riverine biodiversity and the tragedy of the freshwater commons. In S. Sabater & A. Elosegi (Eds.), River Conservation: Challenges and Opportunities (pp. 129–165). BBVA Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dutta, S., Chakraborty, K., & Hazra, S. (2017). Ecosystem structure and trophic dynamics of an exploited ecosystem of Bay of Bengal, Sundarban Estuary, India. Fish Science, 83(2), 145–159.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fath, B. D. (2015). Quantifying economic and ecological sustainability. Ocean & Coastal Management, 108, 13–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fetahi, T., & Mengistou, S. (2007). Trophic analysis of Lake Awasa (Ethiopia) using mass balance Ecopath model. Ecological Modelling, 201, 398–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finn, J. T. (1976). Measures of ecosystem structure and function derived from analysis of flows. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 56(2), 363–380.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Froese, R., & Pauly, D. (Eds.). (2000). FishBase 2000: Concepts designs and data sources, Contribution No. 1594, ICLARM, Los Banos, Laguna, Philippines. 344 p.

  • Froese, R., & Pauly, D. (2020). Fishbase, World Wide Web electronic publications. www.fishbase.org.

  • Gibling, M. R. (2018). River systems and the Anthropocene: A Late Pleistocene and Holocene timeline for human influence. Quaternary, 1(3), 21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gleick, P. H. (1996). Basic water requirements for human activities: Meeting basic needs. Water International, 21(2), 83–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heymans, J. J., Coll, M., Link, J. S., Mackinson, S., Steenbeek, J., Walters, C., & Christensen, V. (2016). Best practice in Ecopath with Ecosim food-web models for ecosystem-based management. Ecological Modelling, 331, 173–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jang, S. H., & Lee, J. H. (2011). Comparison of trophic structures and energy flows using the Ecopath model in the Lake Namyang and the lower reaches of the Nakdong River. Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology, 25(5), 747–759.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joseph, R., & Tessy, P. P. (2010). Water quality and pollution status of Chalakudy river at Kathikudam, Thrissur District, Kerala, India. Nature Environment and Pollution Technology, 9(1), 113–118.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kasprzak, P., Padisak, J., Rainer Koschel, R., Krienitz, L., & Gervais, F. (2008). Chlorophyll a concentration across a trophic gradient of lakes: An estimator of phytoplankton biomass? Limnologica, 38, 327–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan, F., Panikkar, P., & Sharma, A. P. (2015). Modelling the food web for assessment of the impact of stock supplementation in a reservoir ecosystem in India. Fisheries Management and Ecology, 22(5), 359–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan, M. F., & Panikkar, P. (2009). Assessment of impacts of invasive fishes on the food web structure and ecosystem properties of a tropical reservoir in India. Ecological Modelling, 220, 2281–2290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan, M. F., Panikkar, P., Salim, S. M., Leela, R. V., Sarkar, U. K., Das, B. K., & Eregowda, V. M. (2021). Modeling impacts of invasive sharp tooth African catfish Clarias gariepinus (Burchell 1822) and Mozambique tilapia Oreochromis mossambicus (Peters, 1852) on the ecosystem of a tropical reservoir ecosystem in India. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(41), 58310–58321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koenig, L. E., Helton, A. M., Savoy, P., Bertuzzo, E., Heffernan, J. B., Hall, R. O., Jr., & Bernhardt, E. S. (2019). Emergent productivity regimes of river networks. Limnology and Oceanography Letters, 4, 173–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, N. W., Phelps, Q. E., Pierce, C. L., & Colvin, M. E. (2019). A food web modeling assessment of Asian Carp impacts in the Middle and Upper Mississippi River, USA. Food Webs, 21, e00120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lal, D. M., Sreekanth, G. B., Shivakrishna, A., Kumar, R., Nayak, B. B., & Abidi, Z. J. (2021). Ecosystem health status and trophic modeling of an anthropogenically impacted small tropical estuary along India’s west coast. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(26), 35073–35093.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lakra, W. S., Sarkar, U. K., Kumar, R. S., Pandey, A., Dubey, V. K., & Gusain, O. P. (2010). Fish diversity, habitat ecology and their conservation and management issues of a tropical River in Ganga basin, India. The Environmentalist, 30, 306–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Libralato, S., Christensen, V., & Pauly, D. (2006). A method for identifying keystone species in food web models. Ecological Modelling, 195(3-4), 153–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lima, M. A. L., Doria, C. R., Carvalho, A. R., & Angelini, R. (2020). Fisheries and trophic structure of a large tropical river under impoundment. Ecological Indicators, 113, 106162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindeman, R. L. (1942). The trophic-dynamic aspects of ecology. Ecology, 23, 399–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Link, J. S. (2010). Adding rigor to ecological network models by evaluating a set of pre-balance diagnostics: a plea for PREBAL. Ecological Modelling, 221(12), 1580–1591.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lira, A., Angelini, R., Le Loc’h, F., Ménard, F., Lacerda, C., Frédou, T., & Frédou, F. L. (2018). Trophic flow structure of a neotropical estuary in northeastern Brazil and the comparison of ecosystem model indicators of estuaries. Journal of Marine Systems, 182, 31–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Y., Jiang, T., Wang, X. H., Duan, L. J., & Li, S. Y. (2007). Establishment and analysis of the Ecopath model of the ecosystem in the northern continental shelf of South China Sea. Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Sunyatseni, 46(1), 123–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathews, C. P. (1993). Productivity and energy flows at all trophic levels in the River Thames, England: Mark 2. V. Christensen and D. Pauly Trophic models of aquatic ecosystems. ICLARM Conf. Proc, 26, 390, 161-171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mihuc, T. B. (1997). The functional trophic role of lotic primary consumers: generalist versus specialist strategies. Freshwater Biology, 37(2), 455–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohamed, K. S., Zacharia, P. U., Muthiah, C., Abdurahiman, K. P., & Nayak, T. H. (2008). Trophic modelling of the Arabian Sea ecosystem off Karnataka and simulation of fishery yields. Bulletin Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute, 51, 140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morissette, L. (2007). Complexity, cost and quality of ecosystem models and their impact on resilience: a comparative analysis, with emphasis on marine mammals and the Gulf of St. Lawrence. Doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mukherjee, J., Karan, S., Chakrabarty, M., Banerjee, A., Rakshit, N., & Ray, S. (2019). An approach towards quantification of ecosystem trophic status and health through ecological network analysis applied in Hooghly-Matla estuarine system, India. Ecological Indicators, 100, 55–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murugan, S., Joseph, A. P., & Khan, S. A. (2012). Ecological niche of Mugil Cephalus—An ECOPATH with ECOSIM approach in Vellar Estuary (South east coast of India). The International Journal of Pharma and Bio Sciences, 3(1), 662–676.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers, N., Mittermeier, R. A., Mittermeier, C. G., da Fonseca, G. A. B., & Kent, J. (2000). Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature, 403(6772), 853–858.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Odum, E. P. (1969). The strategy of ecosystem development. Science, 104, 262–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palomares, M. L., & Pauly, D. (1998). Predicting food consumption of fish populations as functions of mortality, food types, morphometrics, temperature, and salinity. Marine and Freshwater Research, 49, 447–453.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Panikar, P., & Khan, M. F. (2008). Comparative mass balanced trophic models to assess the impact of environmental management measures in a tropical reservoir ecosystem. Ecological Modelling, 212, 280–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panikkar, P., Khan, M. F., Desai, V. R., Shrivastava, N. P., & Sharma, A. P. (2015). Characterizing trophic interactions of a catfish dominated tropical reservoir ecosystem to assess the effects of management practices. Environmental Biology of Fishes, 98(1), 237–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pauly, D., Christensen, V., & Walters, C. (2000). Ecopath, Ecosim, and Ecospace as tools for evaluating ecosystem impact of fisheries. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 57(3), 697–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Philippsen, J. S., Hauser, M., & Benedito, E. (2015). Isotopic niches of sympatric native and exotic fish species in a Neotropical floodplain. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências, 87(2), 825–833.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Raghavan, R., Prasad, G., Ali, P. A., & Pereira, B. (2008). Fish fauna of Chalakudy River, part of Western Ghats biodiversity hotspot, Kerala, India: Patterns of distribution, threats, and conservation needs. Biodiversity and Conservation, 17(13), 3119–3131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raj, S., Prakash, P., Reghunath, R., Tharian, J. C., Raghavan, R., & Biju Kumar, A. (2021). Distribution of alien invasive species in aquatic ecosystems of the southern Western Ghats, India. Aquatic Ecosystem Health & Management, 24(2), 64–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rakshit, N., Banerjee, A., Mukherjee, J., Chakrabarty, M., Borrett, S. R., & Ray, S. (2017). Comparative study of food webs from two different time periods of Hooghly Matla estuarine system, India through network analysis. Ecological Modelling, 356, 25–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regi, S. R., Smrithi, R., & Biju Kumar, A. (2020). Trophic web structure and ecological network analysis of Sasthamkotta lake, A Ramsar site in Kerala, India. Journal of Aquatic Biology & Fisheries, 8, 67–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renjithkumar, C. R. (2014). Fish germplasm resources and exploited fisheries of the rivers of Kerala and bionomics of ‘red canarese barb’, Hypselobarbus thomassi (Day 1874). Doctoral dissertation, Cochin University of Science and Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renjithkumar, C. R., & Roshni, K. (2021). Feeding habits of an endemic bagrid catfish, Mystus oculatus from Western Ghats of India. Indian Journal of Ecology, 48(4), 1165–1168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renjithkumar, C. R., Roshni, K., & Ranjeet, K. (2020a). Food and feeding habits of Malabar Butter Catfish, Ompok malabaricus (Valenciennes, 1840) from the Chalakudy river, Kerala, India. Journal of Aquatic Biology & Fisheries, 8(S), 98–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renjithkumar, C. R., Roshni, K., & Ranjeet, K. (2020b). Feeding ecology of the endemic freshwater puffer fish Carinotetradon travancoricus (Hora & Nair, 1941) in Western Ghats hotspot, India. International Journal of Aquatic Biology, 85(5), 300–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renjithkumar, C. R., Roshni, K., & Ranjeet, K. (2022). Vulnerability in the feeding ecology of endemic mahseer, Tor malabaricus (Jerdon, 1849) from Western Ghats biodiversity hotspot, India. Inland Water Biology, 15(2), 170–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, B. J., Mulholland, P. J., & Hill, W. R. (2007). Multiple scales of temporal variability in ecosystem metabolism rates: Results from 2 years of continuous monitoring in a forested headwater stream. Ecosystems, 10, 588–606.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Roshni, K., Renjithkumar, C. R., & Kurup, B. M. (2015). Food and feeding habits of Glossogobius giuris in Chalakudy River, Southern Western Ghats, India. International Journal of Scientific Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, 1(4), 321–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roshni, K., Renjithkumar, C. R., & Kurup, B. M. (2016). Food and feeding habits of the exotic fish Oreochromis mossambicus (Peters, 1852) from a tropical reservoir of Chalakudy River, Kerala. Indian Journal of Fisheries, 63(4), 132–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabater, S., & Elosegi, A. (2014). Balancing conservation needs with uses of river ecosystems. Acta Biológica Colombiana, 19(1), 3–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santhanam, R., Srinivasan, A., & Devaraj, M. (1993). Trophic model of an estuarine ecosystem at the Southeast coast of India. In Trophic models of aquatic ecosystems. ICLARM Conference Proceedings, 26, 230–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shannon, C. E., & Wiener, W. (1963). The mathematical theory of communication University (p. 125). Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sreekanth, G. B., Chakraborty, S. K., Jaiswar, A. K., Zacharia, P. U., & Mohamed, K. S. (2021a). Modeling the impacts of fishing regulations in a tropical Indian estuary using Ecopath with Ecosim approach. Environment, Development, and Sustainability, 23(12), 17745–17763.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sreekanth, G. B., Chakraborty, S. K., Jaiswar, A. K., Zacharia, P. U., Mohamed, K. S., & Francour, P. (2020). Trophic network and food web characteristics in a small tropical monsoonal estuary: A comparison with other estuarine systems. Indian Journal of Geo Marine Sciences, 49(5), 774–789.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sreekanth, G. B., Ingole, B., Rakshit, N., Giriyan, A., D’souza, F., Dourado, S., Mayekar, T., Rivonkar, P., VishnuRadhan, R., & Bhanudasrao, C. E. (2022b). Exploring the ecosystem health of a tropical Indian estuary using mass-balanced ecosystem model. Aquatic Sciences, 84(3), 46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sreekanth, G. B., Mujawar, S., Lal, D. M., Mayekar, T., Stephen, J., Raghavan, R., Appukuttan, B. K., & Ingole, B. S. (2022a). Modelling the mixed impacts of multiple invasive alien fish species in a closed freshwater ecosystem in India. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(38), 58278–58296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sreekanth, G. B., Rakshit, N., Lal, D. M., Ingole, B., Rivonkar, P., Naik, G., Mayekar, T., & Bhanudasrao, C. E. (2021b). Ecosystem modelling to understand the trophic dynamics and ecosystem health of a small tropical Indian estuary. Ecological Informatics, 66, 101429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uehlinger, U. (2000). Resistance and resilience of ecosystem metabolism in a floodprone river system. Freshwater Biology, 45, 319–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulanowicz, R. E., & Puccia, C. J. (1990). Mixed trophic impacts in ecosystems. Coenoses, 5, 7–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Villanueva, M. C., Isumbisho, M., Kaningini, B., Moreau, J., & Micha, J. (2008). Modelling trophic interactions in Lake Kivu. What roles do exotics play? Ecological Modelling, 212, 422–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vivekanandan, E., Srinath, M., Pillai, V. N., Immanuel, S., & Kurup, K. N. (2003). Trophic model of the coastal fisheries ecosystem of the southwest coast of India. Assessment, management and future directions for coastal fisheries in Asian countries, 67, 281–298.

  • Wang, X. X., Peng, L., Su, C. J., & Cheng, G. W. (2017). Impact of hydropower dam development on river ecosystems: Ecopath model application on the Red River in China as an example. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 26(6), 2811–2822.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiao, H., Dee, L. E., Chadès, I., Peyrard, N., Sabbadin, R., Stringer, M., & Eve, M. M. (2018). Win-wins for biodiversity and ecosystem service conservation depend on the trophic levels of the species providing services. Journal of Applied Ecology, 55, 2160–2170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeakley, J. A., Ervin, D., Chang, H., Granek, E. F., Dujon, V., Shandas, V., & Brown, D. (2016). Ecosystem services of streams and rivers. River science: research and management for the 21st century (pp. 335–352). Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the Kerala University of Fisheries and Ocean Studies (KUFOS), the Panchayath officials, fishermen, and local communities of Chalakudy River for their active participation during sampling and data collection. The authors also express their gratitude towards Dr. Renjithkumar CR, Dr. Roshini K, Shri. Vishwajeet Prajapati, Technical officer, KVK (Krishi Vikas Kendra), North Goa, for the logistic, technical, and scientific support provided, and Mohammad Nadim Ansari, Ph.D. Scholar, KUFOS, for his sincere help in creating the map layout. The authors also acknowledge the constructive suggestions from the two reviewers which has enhanced the quality of this paper.

Funding

This work was funded by the plan project of Kerala University of Science and Technology.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Kerala University of Fisheries and Ocean Studies, Kochi, 682 506, India

    Siby Mariya Sandra & K. Ranjeet

  2. ICAR-Central Coastal Agricultural Research Institute, Old Goa, Goa, 403402, India

    G. B. Sreekanth

Authors
  1. Siby Mariya Sandra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. G. B. Sreekanth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. K. Ranjeet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Sandra Mariya Siby, Sreekanth GB, and Ranjeet K conceived the idea and designed the methodology. Sandra Mariya Siby carried out the sampling and data collection and prepared the original draft. Sreekanth GB performed the data analysis, model fitting, and validations. Ranjeet K did the reviewing and editing. All authors contributed during draft-reviewing and final manuscript editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. Ranjeet.

Ethics declarations

This is to certify that all authors have read, understood, and have complied as applicable with the statement on “Ethical responsibilities of Authors” as found in the Instructions for Authors and are aware that with minor exceptions, no changes can be made to authorship once the paper is submitted.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

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

Supplementary information

ESM 1

(DOCX 15 kb)

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

The description of different ecological indices generated in Ecopath (index, equation and details)

Particulars

Equation

Details

Ecopath model

\({B}_i.{\left(\frac{P}{B}\right)}_i.E{E}_i-\sum_{j=1}^i{B}_j.{\left(\frac{Q}{B}\right)}_j.D{C}_{ji}-E{X}_i=0\)……………(1)

i- functional group, and j- predator groups of I, ‘Bi’ - biomass; ‘P/Bi’ -production biomass ratio (coefficient of total mortality (Z)); ‘EEi’ ecotrophic efficiency; ‘Bj’ is the biomass of predator group; ‘Q/Bj’ is the consumption per biomass ratio; EXi is the export

Fish biomass

\(B=\frac{Y}{F},F=Z-M,Z=\frac{P}{B}=\frac{L_{\infty }-L}{L-{L}^{\prime }}\)… ………………………………(2)

Where B, Y, F, Z and M represent the biomass (t km−2), the annual catch yield (t km−2 year−1), the fishing mortality (year−1), total mortality (year−1), and natural mortality (year−1); K, L∞ , L, L' represent the growth rate of Von Bertalanffy Growth Function, asymptotic length of fish (cm), mean length of fish (cm), cut off length of fish (cm)respectively. K, L∞, L, L' were derived from the Fish Base website (www.fishbase.org) and previously published studies (Mohamed et al., 2008; Vivekanandan et al., 2003).

Consumption/biomass of Fish

\(\log \left(\frac{Q}{B}\right)=7.964-0.204\ \log \left(W\infty \right)-1.965\ T+0.083\ A+0.532\ h+0.398\ d\)………….. (3)

W∞ is the asymptotic weight (g), T is an expression for the mean annual temperature of the water body, expressed using T=1000/Kelvin (Kelvin = °C+273.15), A is the aspect ratio, h is a dummy variable expressing food type (1 for herbivores, and 0 for detritivorous and carnivorous species), and d is a dummy variable also expressing food type (1 for detritivorous, and 0 for herbivorous and carnivorous)

Consumption/biomass of shrimps and crabs

\({~}^{Q}\!\left/ \!{~}_{B}\right.={10}^{6.37}\times {0.0313}^T\times {W_{\infty}}^{-0.168}\times {1.38}^P\times {1.89}^{HD}\)…….. (4)

P is feeding type variable (1 for apex/pelagic predators and zooplankton feeders and 0 for other feeding types). HD is the feeding type (0 for carnivores and 1 for herbivores and detritivorous).

Detritus biomass

logD = 0.954  log PP + 0.863 log E − 2.41…………….(5)

‘D’ is the detrital biomass in (gCm−2), PP is the primary production in (gCm−2); E is the euphotic depth in meters. The depth of the euphotic zone was calculated as follows: E = 2.5×SD (Secchi depth in meters).

Pedigree index (P) and measure of fit (t*)

\(P=\sum_{i=1}^n\sum_{j=1}\frac{l_{ij}}{n}\)…………………………….(6)

\({t}^{\ast }=P.\sqrt{\left(n-2\right)}\) / \(\sqrt{1-{P}^2}\)…………………….(7)

l ij is the pedigree index for model group i and parameter j, n is the total number of functional groups. P is the overall pedigree index of the system.

Total system throughput (TST)

\(TST=\sum_{ij}{T}_{ij}\)…………………………………(8)

TST is the summation of all flows (Total consumption + total export + total respiration + total flows to detritus) through all compartments of the network in an ecosystem. ‘Tij’ is the flow from compartment i to compartment j.

Ascendency (A)

\(A=\sum_{ij}{T}_{ij}\mathit{\log}\left(\frac{ Ti j\ T}{Ti\ Tj}\right)\)………………………………………………….(9)

The fraction of material or energy flow of a system which determines the organization level of the system is denoted as Ascendency (A).

Finn cycling index (FCI)

\(FCI=\frac{TST}{TST_C}\)…………………………………………………………………(12)

Finn’s Cycling Index (1976) measures the fraction of the total system through flow which is cycled, i.e., the flow that returns to any specific compartment after having exited from that same compartment. Where ‘TSTC’ represents the amount of TST that is recycled within the system

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sandra, S.M., Sreekanth, G.B. & Ranjeet, K. Trophic fingerprinting of a pristine but rapidly deteriorating downstream region of a Western Ghats River. Environ Monit Assess 195, 1008 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-023-11501-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-023-11501-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation