The Macrophyte Indices for Rivers to Assess the Ecological Conditions in the Klina River in the Republic of Kosovo.
ecological status
macrophyte
macrophyte indices
pollution
Journal
Plants (Basel, Switzerland)
ISSN: 2223-7747
Titre abrégé: Plants (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101596181
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
30 May 2022
30 May 2022
Historique:
received:
26
04
2022
revised:
21
05
2022
accepted:
24
05
2022
entrez:
10
6
2022
pubmed:
11
6
2022
medline:
11
6
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Macrophytes are important elements of aquatic ecosystems that grow in or near water. Their taxonomic composition, species diversity, depth, and density are indicators of environmental health; as such, Macrophytes are used to assess the ecological status of water bodies. Under the aim of assessing the ecological status of the Klina River in Kosovo, a survey was conducted at eight sampling sites along the river course to analyze macrophyte composition, diversity, density, and cover. Three samples were collected at each sampling site from early June to late September. The following macrophyte indices were used to assess the ecological status of the river: Macrophyte Index for Rivers (MIR), River Macrophyte Nutrient Index (RMNI), and River Macrophyte Hydraulic Index (RMHI). Our sampling area included the upper reaches of the river where no organic pollution was detected (oligotrophic), the middle reaches where polluted water from farms is discharged into the river, and the lower reaches characterized by heavy organic pollution from settlements and various industrial activities. There is a positive correlation (p < 0.05) between water temperature, turbidity, electrical conductivity (EC), total dissolved solids (TDS), orthophosphates (PO43−), ammonia (NH4+), nitrites (NO2−), calcium (Ca2+), and potassium (K+) with plant density, RMNI, RMHI, EQR-RMNI, EQR-RMHI, and MIR. Sodium (Na+) has stronger positive correlation (p < 0.01) with RMNI and RMHI indices and negative correlation with EQR-RMNI and EQR-RMHI. Our results show that ecological status along the river varies from high and good upstream to poor, bad, and moderate running downstream.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35684241
pii: plants11111469
doi: 10.3390/plants11111469
pmc: PMC9183134
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
Environ Technol. 2018 Mar;39(6):702-716
pubmed: 28475410
J Environ Health Sci Eng. 2014 Jul 16;12:106
pubmed: 25089203
Front Plant Sci. 2018 May 14;9:629
pubmed: 29868084
Front Plant Sci. 2019 Jan 09;9:1980
pubmed: 30687372
Sci Total Environ. 2007 Jun 1;378(3):253-62
pubmed: 17433416
Trends Ecol Evol. 2015 Feb;30(2):104-13
pubmed: 25542312
PeerJ. 2021 Feb 17;9:e10564
pubmed: 33643698
Front Plant Sci. 2019 Jan 08;9:1947
pubmed: 30671079
Environ Monit Assess. 2014 Sep;186(9):5501-17
pubmed: 24838800
Environ Pollut. 2002;119(3):413-20
pubmed: 12166674