Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Bijoy Nandan S - UEI Day 2 - Kochi Jan18


Published on

Bijoy Nandan S - UEI Day 2 - Kochi Jan18

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Bijoy Nandan S - UEI Day 2 - Kochi Jan18

  1. 1. Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Tourism Dr. S. Bijoy Nandan Professor Department of Marine Biology, Microbiology & Biochemistry School of Marine Sciences Cochin University of Science & Technology (CUSAT) Improving freshwater monitoring frameworks and data for research and management USER ENGAGEMENT INITIATIVE 23rd – 25th January 2018 Riviera Suites, Kochi, Kerala, India
  2. 2. Freshwater Ecosystems cover less than 1% among most threatened ecosystems multiple threats biodiversity loss one in three freshwater species is already threatened (IUCN 2016) Living Planet Report 2016 (WWF)
  3. 3. How do we define ‘biodiversity’?  Biodiversity = biotic diversity = biological diversity  Biodiversity may be defined as the number, variety and variability of living organisms at all levels within a region. Three levels of diversity are highlighted:  Genetic diversity  Species or organismal diversity  Ecosystem or ecological diversity – including functional variety and the variety of interactions.  Some definitions specify landscape diversity as well.  Biodiversity = Speciation – Extinction
  4. 4.  Biodiversity is usually measured in terms of species.  Species diversity ≠ species richness.  Species diversity ≠ taxonomic diversity.  Thus if all the conditions of the species are the same, 2 species belonging to the same genus have a lower taxonomic diversity than 2 species belonging to different families while having the same amount of species diversity. How do we define ‘biodiversity’? Species or organismal diversity (2)
  5. 5.  An ecosystem or ecological system is defined as a functioning unit of interacting organisms (plant, animal and microbe = biocoenosis) and their interactions with their physical and chemical environment (biotope) often linked to an area.  Ecosystem diversity is defined as the variety of ecosystems within a bigger landscape and their variability over time.  Ecological diversity is variously regarded as the variety of ecosystems in an area and their interactions or intra-ecosystem variety. How do we define ‘biodiversity’? Ecosystem or ecological diversity
  6. 6. Checklist of considerations during preparation of a monitoring programme : SETTING OBJECTIVES FOR MONITORING PROGRAMME • What features of conservation interest are to be monitored? • What is the objective for each feature? • What attributes define condition in these features and what are likely to be their acceptable limits? • How often should monitoring be carried out? • What are the operational and/or management objectives for the site? • Are there external factors that may have significant impacts on the site? • What monitoring has been undertaken, and are baseline surveys required? • Should the site be subdivided into monitoring units?
  7. 7. SELECTION OF METHODS FOR MONITORING EACH ATTRIBUTE • Is the method likely to damage the environment? • Are samples required? • Will the method provide the appropriate type of measurement? • Can the method measure the attribute across an appropriate range of conditions? • Is the method prone to substantial measurement error?
  8. 8. DESIGNING A SAMPLING STRATEGY • Has the method been thoroughly tested and are preliminary field trials necessary? • Is the method sufficiently precise? • Should sample locations be permanent or not? • When should the data be collected? • How will consistency be assured? REVIEWING THE MONITORING PROGRAMME • Are there sufficient long-term resources available? • Are personnel sufficiently trained and experienced? • Is specialist equipment required and available?
  9. 9. DATA RECORDING AND STORAGE • How will data be recorded in the field? • How will the data be stored? • Who will hold and manage the data? DATA ANALYSIS, INTERPRETATION AND REVIEW • Who will carry out the analysis and when? • How will the data be analysed? • What statistical tests are appropriate to analyse the data? • Is transformation of the data necessary before statistical analysis?
  10. 10. DESIGNING A SAMPLING STRATEGY • Has the method been thoroughly tested and are preliminary field trials necessary? • Is the method sufficiently precise? • Should sample locations be permanent or not? • When should the data be collected? • How will consistency be assured? REVIEWING THE MONITORING PROGRAMME • Are there sufficient long-term resources available? • Are personnel sufficiently trained and experienced? • Is specialist equipment required and available?
  11. 11. DATA RECORDING AND STORAGE • How will data be recorded in the field? • How will the data be stored? • Who will hold and manage the data? DATA ANALYSIS, INTERPRETATION AND REVIEW • Who will carry out the analysis and when? • How will the data be analysed? • What statistical tests are appropriate to analyse the data? • Is transformation of the data necessary before statistical analysis?
  12. 12. Biodiversity --------- • Fish (lakes and rivers) • Benthic invertebrates (lakes and rivers) • Zooplankton (lakes) • Benthic algae (lakes and rivers) • Phytoplankton (lakes) • Macrophytes (lakes) • Riparian vegetation (rivers) • Aquatic birds (lakes) • Microbes • Others
  13. 13. Biodiversity: 3 aspects x 3 levels
  14. 14.  14 m spp, of which 2/3 in tropics  0.8% per year deforestation  2-5 species lost per hour or 14,000- 40,000 spp per year.  On average 220 populations per species (3 billion populations on earth) i.e. 16 m populations per year or 1800 per hour are being lost from tropical forests alone. BIODIVERSITY LOSS
  15. 15. Biodiversity Genes, species, ecosystems Structure, function, composition Supporting: soil formation, nutrient cycling, plant production Provisioning: Food, water, fuel, Fibre, bio- chemicals, genes Regulating: Climate, disease, pests, floods, Water quality Cultural: Spiritual, recreation, aesthetic Ecosystem Services Security, material for a good life, health, good social relations Freedom and choice Wellbeing Is a necessary condition for Are an irreplaceable component of ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
  16. 16. At any level, diversity has at least two components… • How many different types of things are present – Elephant, rhino and lion is less diverse than – Elephant, rhino, lion, leopard and buffalo • How evenly they are represented – 1000 elephants and 1 lion is less diverse than – 500 elephants and 500 lions
  17. 17. ‘Policy’ ways of measuring biodiversity • ‘Extinction based’ (IUCN) – Threatened species (Red Data Books) • ‘Area based’ (Millennium goals) – Area under protection – Area of a key habitat (eg Forest cover) • ‘Richness based’ – Indicator groups or species eg CI Rapid Biodiversity Assessment • Complementarity –based – Various conservation optimisation tools, eg CPLAN • Various spatial representations – Hotspots, last wild places
  18. 18. ‘Academic’ ways of measuring biodiversity Species level • Richness: Total number of species in an area (α diversity) • Species turnover along a gradient (β diversity) Ecosystem level • Number of different habitats or ecosystems (γ diversity) Genetic level • Genetic homology • Cladistic distance
  19. 19. Royal Society Report 2003 • ‘… no sound basis exists for assessing performance against these targets.’ • ‘The fate of organisms not yet recognised by science cannot be measured’ • Lack of baselines • Biodiversity measures must be related to the objectives of measurement
  20. 20. Measurement of biodiversity • Biodiversity is a broad concept, so a variety of objective measures have been created in order to empirically measure biodiversity. Each measure of biodiversity relates to a particular use of the data. • Species richness - the least sophisticated of the indices available. • Simpson index • Shannon index • Alpha diversity refers to diversity within a particular area, community or ecosystem, and is measured by counting the number of taxa within the ecosystem (usually species) • Beta diversity is species diversity between ecosystems; this involves comparing the number of taxa that are unique to each of the ecosystems. • Gamma diversity is a measure of the overall diversity for different ecosystems within a region.
  21. 21. Methodology for Assessing Biodiversity • The biodiversity has remained as one of the central themes of ecology since many years. However after the Rio’s Earth Summit, it has become the main theme for not only ecologists, but the whole biological community, environmentalists, planners and administrators. • As many countries including India are party to the Convention on Biological Diversity, each nation has the solemn and sincere responsibility to record the species of plants and animals occurring in their respective countries assess the biodiversity properly and evolve suitable management strategies for conserving the biodiversity which is often described as the Living Heritage of Man. The methodology used for biodiversity assessment is elaborated here.
  22. 22. Why to Study Biodiversity? • Measures of diversity are frequently seen as indicators of the wellbeing of ecological systems. • Despite changing fashions & preoccupations, diversity has remained central theme of ecology. The well documented patterns of spatial & temporal variation in diversity which intrigued early investigators of natural world continue to stimulate minds of ecologists today. • Considerable debate surrounds the measurement of diversity. It is mainly due to the fact that ecologists have devised a huge range of indices and models for measuring diversity. So for the various environments, habitats & situations species abundance models & diversity indices should be used & suitability evaluated.
  23. 23. Biodiversity Indices: • One good way to get a feel for diversity measures is to test their performance with one’s own data. • A rather more scientific method of selecting a diversity index is on the basis of whether it fulfils certain functions criteria‐ability to discriminate between sites, dependence on sample size, what component of diversity is being measured, and whether the index is widely used and understood. • The various diversity measures are given below.
  24. 24. Species Richness Indices Simpson’s Index Margalef Index Berger‐Parker Index Rarefaction Index Species Diversity Indices Shannon‐Wiener Index Brillouin Index Log series Index Log Normal Diversity Jackknife Index Q Statistic Species Evenness Indices
  25. 25. Newly Introduced Indices Taxonomic Distinctness Index Phylogenetic Diversity Index Abundance/Biomass Comparison (ABC) Plots Dominance Plot Geometric Class Plots Species Area Plot
  26. 26. • AZTI- Marine Biotic Index (AMBI):AMBI v5.0) (Borja et al. 2000, 2007) • Multivariate AMBI (M-AMBI): Muxika et al. (2007) • Benthic Opportunistic Polychaetes Amphipods Index (BOPA): Dauvin and Ruellet (2007) • BENTIX: Zenetos et al. (2004) • Macrobenthic feeding guild:(Fauchald and Jumars, 1979; Gaston, 1987; Sprung, 1994; Oug et al., 1998; Mancinelli et al., 1998; Wieking and Kroncke, 2003, 2005) Marine bioticIndices (Benthic)
  27. 27. Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011- 2020 and Aichi Targets: • The Strategic Plan is comprised of a shared vision, a mission, strategic goals and 20 ambitious yet achievable targets, collectively known as the Aichi Targets • The Strategic Plan serves as a flexible framework for the establishment of national and regional targets and it promotes the coherent and effective implementation of the three objectives of the Convention on Biological Diversity. Aichi Targets
  28. 28. • Strategic Goal A: Address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss by mainstreaming biodiversity across government and society • Strategic Goal B: Reduce the direct pressures on biodiversity and promote sustainable use • Strategic Goal C: Improve the status of biodiversity by safeguarding ecosystems, species and genetic diversity • Strategic Goal D: Enhance the benefits to all from biodiversity and ecosystem services. Aichi Targets
  29. 29. • India is one among the 17 mega biodiversity nations & 9th position in terms of freshwater mega biodiversity • The freshwater ecosystems of India include all types of inland wetlands: lakes, rivers, ponds, streams, groundwater, springs, cave waters, floodplains, as well as bogs, marshes and swamps, including 26 Ramsar Sites • India with 2.4% of global landmass has 4% of the world’s freshwater resources • As many as 9457 animal species, representing 9.7 % of total number of Indian fauna (i.e., 97,708 species) recognized from freshwater ecosystems, of which invertebrate groups comprise 7861 spp. (83.1%) & vertebrate, 1597 spp. (16.9%)
  30. 30. India has remarkable coastal biodiversity 3985 species in mangrove ecosystem: 199 coral species (all 3 types: atoll, fringing & barrier) 14 seagrass species, 844 seaweed species Coastal Ecosystem Extent (km2) Mangroves 4445 Tidal/ Mud flats 23,621 Sandy beaches/ bars/ spits 4,210 Coral reefs 2,375 Salt marshes 1,698 Lagoons 1,564 Estuaries 1,540 Other vegetation 1,391 Aquaculture ponds 769 Salt pans 655 Creeks 192 Rocky coasts 177 Back water 171 Total 43,763
  31. 31. KERALA Kerala – blessed with beautiful backwaters and estuaries which are rich in faunal elements, spread over 38,863 km2 Area (in 38863 ha., Population : 318.39 lakhs Coastline : 590 Km Water resources Backwaters: 53 nos. 46129 ha. Rivers:44 nos. 85000 ha. & length of 4827 km Reservoirs:53 nos. 42890 ha. Ponds and Tanks:47216 nos. 27625 ha. Brackish water area : 65213 ha. Prawn filtration fields : 234 nos. 12873 ha. Mangrove areas : 1924 ha.
  32. 32. Ramsar sites and Vembanad  Identified Ramsar sites in India – 25 no  Area- 15.26 million hectares (4.6% of the country)  Kerala – 3 Nos. (2002)  Vembanad lake (lat. 90 30’ and 100 12’; long.76010’ and 76029’) - largest backwater system on the southwest coast of India.  Area - 36,329 ha Vembanad Wetland System  Border of Alappuzha, Kottayam & Ernakulam Districts  Supports a highly productive agriculture system, Kuttanad – the ‘rice bowl of Kerala’ spread over 1100km2 - reclaimed portion of lake
  33. 33.  Vembanad backwater – massive & vibrant coastal wetland ecosystem with a unique priceless heritage serving to a variety of economic activities of Kerala  Supports Kuttanad-the ‘Rice bowl of Kerala’, 2m below MSL  Unrestricted human interference for heterogeneous purposes (Thaneermukkom barrage, Thottapilly spill way) had irrevocable adverse consequences on the environmental entity of the backwater  Scientific information on ecosystem based analysis of the environment coupled with biodiversity and fishery production potential on a comprehensive basis is lacking from the wetland after commissioning of the barrage in 1976  In view of this, present study reveals the intricate ecological aspects of the wetlands in relation to its production dynamics that would go a long way in its sustainable management.
  34. 34. Muvattupu zha Meena chil Pamba Achank ovil Manimala yar Avera ge Tot al 5029.11 1512.97 4070.96 1252.61 1816.15 3202.29  Average monthly river discharge - 3202.29 Mm3) Average monthly rain fall in Alappuzha 185.24 mm3 Rich in biodiversity Pathiramanal island & Kumarakam Bird sanctuary  Due to the construction of Thanneermukkom barrage (1975) - two distinct saline and freshwater zones were created , altering the entire original ecological characteristics of the ecosystem. Thaneermukkom Barrage Globally threatened birds Spot-billed pelican Oriental darter Black headed Ibis Ferruginous Pochard  Home for 91 local species of birds and 50 migratory birds from different parts of the world. Physiography
  35. 35. Objectives: • To study the critical water and sediment quality of the ecosystem • Evaluate the primary productivity patterns & assess the distribution and abundance of phytoplankton, aquatic macrophytes, zooplankton and benthic fauna • Study the fish & shell fish resources and fishery including catch and effort, stock assessment, species composition, craft and gear, Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE) • A total conservation and management based model on the above ecosystem based concept would be evolved for the sustainable management and effective use of the Vembanad – Kol Wetland. Sampling Stations St.1 Punnamada St.2 Pallathuruthy St.3 Marthadam St.4 Aryad St.5 Pathiramanal St.6Thaneermukkom South St.7Thaneermukkom North St.8 Varanadu St.9 Perumbalam St.10 Aroor  Ten study stations were fixed by GPS, based on ecological importance  24 months sampling from March 2011 to February 2013 were conducted  Observations were made seasonally viz., Premonsoon (Feb – May), Monsoon (June- Sep) and Postmonsoon (Oct-Jan)
  36. 36.  Total area originally was 36,329 ha. & present area is reported to be 13,224 ha.  From 1834 to 1984 23,105 ha. Reclaimed shrunk by 37% over a period of 100 years  Reduction in depth 6.7 – 4.4m over the years Reduction in depth range in different sectors of Vembanad Wetland Ecosystem Sectors Depth in range (m) 50 yrs ago 20yrs ago South of Thaneermukkom 8-9 3-3.5 Between Thaneermukkom bund & Vaikom 8-9 3-4 Between Vaikom & South Paravoor 7-9 4-5 Between South Paravooor to Aroor 5-6 3-4 Between Aroor & South of Willington Island 7-8 7-8 Bolgatti to Cherai 3-4.5 2-2.5 Cherai to Munambam 3-6 2-5.4 Vembanad then and now? Vembanad shrunk by 37% over a period of 100 yrs (Gopalan et al., 1983) 37
  37. 37. St. 4 ARYAD St.5 PATHIRAMANAL St. 6 SOUTH OF TMB St. 3 MARTHANDAM On western side of the backwater, joining portion of Meenachil river, Agricultural runoff from Padashekarams on the eastern side, water way for house boats and transport boats. Av. Depth- 4.7m The widest point and the main basin of the Vembanad backwater system. Fishing activity, live clam harvesting,sand mining and lime shell deposits were the major activities in the station. Av depth-2.7m. Situated in Muhamma.Tourist spot, home for 91 local species of birds and 50 migratory birds, clam fishery mining, Av. Depth-4.4m Narrowest part of lake, influenced by intense fishing activity, sand mining and inland water transport. Unscientific operation of TMB severely affects ecological characteristics of Kuttanad. Av.depth-6.1m
  38. 38. St. 8 VARANADU St. 9 PERUMBALAM St.7 NORTH OF TMB St. 10 AROOR North of TMB, a transition zone between north and south of the backwater. Influenced by tides and currents from mouth of the estuary. Intense fishing activity, sand mining and inland water transport. Av. depth-3.3m. Influenced by discharge from United distilleries of (Mc Dowells) on the western side of the water body. Local fishing using cast nets and traps, dredging for clamshell beds by TCL. Av. depth- 1.7m. On the eastern side, anthropogenic activities like land filling, construction activities, Local clam fishery mining, fishing by cast nets, stake nets. Av. depth-3.1m Near to bar mouth, influenced by tidal action, currents, saline water from nearby Arabian Sea, discharges from sea food industries and sewage wastes from the Kochi metro city, fishing activities like stake nets and cast nets by traditional fishermen Av. depth-7.74m
  39. 39. Field sampling
  40. 40. Salinity 0 10 20 30 S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 ppt Station Seasonal Variation of Salinity (SW) 2010 - 2013 PRE 1 MN 1 PM 1 PRE 2 MN 2  Average annual salinity ranged from 0.9ppt in St. 2 (Pallathuruthy) to 14.18ppt in St. 10 (Aroor).  An oligohaline condition prevailed in the southern stations where as meso and polyhaline condition prevailed in northern stations. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 ppt Extreme reduction from 23 ppt Josanto (1971) ,during pre barrage period to 2.63ppt in 2011-2013 period salinity fluctuation immediately south of TMB (2011-2013) p g S9 S10 S2 S3 S1 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 Samples 100 90 80 70 60 50 Similarity Transform: Squareroot Resemblance: S17 Bray Curtis similarity Bray – Curtis similarity index of salinity – St. 1 to 4 with limnetic condition (<0.5ppt) and St. 5 to St. 8 with oligohaline (0.5-5ppt) condition formed separate group. St. 9 and St. 10 with mesohaline (5-18ppt) condition formed another group Barrage closed months South of Barrage 2.16ppt North of Barrag e15.4p pt
  41. 41. Most appalling ecological outcome of Physical intervention – Thaneermukkom Barrage Disruption of physical and biological continuity of the lake with coastal waters • Resulting in rapid decline fish yield and biodiversity Major environmental factor that influenced fishery - Salinity Josanto (1971) - 23ppt KWBS(1989) - 6 ppt Unnithan et al (2001) - 3.87 ppt Padmakumar et al,(2001) - 4.31ppt Present study - 1.62ppt Average – South of TMB
  42. 42. Spatial variation of heavy metals in water samples of Vembanad Lake during February, 2017 Spatial variation of heavy metals in water samples of Vembanad Lake during April, 2017 Metallic contamination 2017-18 Water : Cu, 0.75 to 8.56µg/l, Cd max 1.44, Zn 9.26-101.8 µg/l, Pb 7.13-52.5 , Ni 0-9.56, Fe heavy loadings Sediment: Cu, 8.1to 177.6 mg/kg, Zn 27.4-210 mg/kg, Pb 7.13-52.5 , Ni 2.31-194 mg/kg
  43. 43. • In a previous study conducted by KSPCB in collaboration with CUSAT reported the presence of Organochlorine pesticide Heptachlor in the samples collected from the Punnamada station. • In this study, it is noted that some of the compounds like Benzyl benzoate, benzenepropanoic acid, derivatives of phenol, paracetamol etc are present in most of the samples analyzed. • It shows the anthropogenic enrichment of drugs in water bodies mainly the pharmaceuticals. • The presence of pharmaceuticals in our waterways and drinking water is a complex and potentially serious problem that has gained national attention with the public, lawmakers, and regulators (Mae Wu et al, 2009). PESTICIDE contamination
  44. 44. Season N/P Si/P PRM 6.16 20.55 MN 4.89 16.19 PM 6.85 12.74 South of TMB 5.83 16.85 North of TMB 4.71 12.13 The Redfield ratio (N:P)  The mean N: P ratio was below the normal Redfield ratio (16). Maximum of 6.85 observed during PM  A nitrogen limiting condition (N: P < 16) - in Vembanad, similar to the tropical lakes, rivers and estuaries.  Maximum Si: P was observed during PRM (20.55) Parameter PRM MN PM NH3 - N 5.54 4.04 7.82 NO2 - N 0.32 0.22 0.16 NO3 - N 1.04 1.99 1.33 PO4 - P 1.19 1.27 1.9 SiO4 -Si 21.9 20.17 18.84 The seasonal average values of nutrients in the waters of Vembanad  Ammonia contributed maximum during the PM (7.82 µmol/l) as compared to the PRM (av. 5.54 µmol/l) and MN (av. 4.04µmol/l)  Maximum value of Nitrite-nitrogen was observed during PRM (av. 0.32µmol/l) and minimum during PM (av. 0.16µmol/l). The lowest nitrate –nitrogen was observed during PRM (av. 1.04µmol/l)  The lowest DIP was observed during the PRM (av. 1.19 µmol/l) as compared to MN (av. 1.9µmol /l) and PM (av. 1.9µmol/l).  A slight increase in the silicate was noticeable during the PRM (av. 21.9µmol/l) as compared to the MN (20.17µmol/l)
  45. 45. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 mg/m3 Station Seasonal Variation of Chlorophyll a during 2011 - 2013 PRE 1 MN 1 PM 1 PRE 2 MN 2 PM 2 -5 0 5 10 15 S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 mg/m3 Station Seasonal Variation of Chlorophyll b during 2011 - 2013 PRE 1 MN 1 PM 1 PRE 2 MN 2 Chlorophyll a The av. annual Chlorophyll a ranged from 6.13 in St 6 to 15.95mg/m3 in St.4 • During 2011-2012 period maximum Chlorophyll a was observed during premonsoon (av.11.18mg/m3) followed by monsoon (6.15mg/m3) • During 2012-2013 period maximum production was observed during monsoon (14.52mg/m3) followed by premonsoon (11.08mg/m3) Maximum value of Chlorophyll b was observed during premonsoon (4.37mg/m3 in 2011-2012 and 3.03mg/m3 in 2012-2013). Minimum was observed during monsoon 1.93mg/m3 in 2011-2012 period and 0.5mg/m3 in 2012-2013 period.
  46. 46. 0 10 20 30 40 S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 g/m3 Stations Seasonal Variation of Algal Biomass 2011 - 2013 PRE 1 MN 1 PM 1 PRE 2 MN 2 PM 2 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 mgC Stations phytoplankton Carbon PRE 1 MN 1 PM 1 PRE 2 MN 2 PM 2  Seasonal variation of Algal biomass was distinct annually. During 2011-2012 period maximum value observed in premonsoon (av.9.14g/m3), in 2012-2013 monsoon season showed maximum (Av.9.9g/m3)  In both year phytoplankton carbon was maximum during premonsoon (av. 726.39mgC) Seasonal variation of algal biomass and phytoplankton carbon was distinct in St. 4 (Aryad). A high value was observed during monsoon
  47. 47. Total Organic Carbon Total Inorganic Carbon Total Carbon Total Nitrogen Carbon dynamics of Vembanad wetland system South of Barrage North of Barrage TOC (mg/l) 3.97 3.14 IC (mg/l) 4.59 10.65 TC (mg/l) 8.61 13.59 TN (µg/l) 623.4 529.14 • There was no distinct variation between surface and bottom water carbon values • TOC ranged from 2.47mg/l in St. 5 to 7.03mg/l in St 1. The sewages and oil leakage(waste oil) from house boats influence the higher value of TOC in St. 1 • TC value ranged between 4.93mg/l in St. 6 to 23.86mg/l in st 10. Higher TC value in St. 10 may be from the shell fish processing industry near the sampling station • Lowest IC value observed in St. 6 (4.93mg/l) and highest in St. 10 (23.86mg/l) • Except TOC, the IC & TC value was always high in northern part of barrage. Higher TOC in southern part contributed by transport boats, house boats and organic chemicals and pesticides from the paddy fields • The TN value ranged between 276.9µg/l in st 5 to 1210µg/l in st10 • Compared to northern part (529.14µg/l) southern part showed maximum value (623.38µg/l) • The fertilizers and pesticides residues from the Kuttanad paddy field increase the nitrogenous materials in the southern part
  48. 48. Qasim et al.,1969 1994-1996 (south of TMB) 2011-2013 (south of TMB) Temp(0C) 28.5 29.9 30 Depth (m) - 2.18 4.2 Transparency (m) - 1.44 1.7 Turbidity (NTU) - 4.1 2.09 Conductivity (mS) - 2.81 2.55 pH 7-8.3 6.8 6.97 CO2 (mg/l) - 6.1 4.66 DO(mg/l) 1.5-6 6.5 7.08 BOD (mg/l) - - 2.78 Alkalinity (mg/L) - 21.9 31.62 Salinity (ppt) 5-32 1.2 0.01-12.8 SiO4-Si(µmol/l) 2-50 51.48 20.95 PO4-P (µmol/l) 0.3-2 0.2 1.27 NO3-N (µmol/l) 1-30 2.74 1.35 GPP (gC/m3/day) - 0.99 2.9 NPP (gC/m3/day) - 0.51 1.53 The average depth increases during the study period from 2.18m in 90s to 4.2m at present. Unauthorized/illegal sand mining in the southern sector made more deep Comparing the previous year the DO value increases slightly from 6.5 to 7.08mg/l Alkalinity also increases in the southern part from 21.9 to 31.62mg/l The average salinity observed as 1.2ppt during 90’s, at present it ranged between0.01-12.8ppt with an average of 1.62ppt. Average silicate value decreased from 51.48µmol/l to 20.95µmol/l Concentration of phosphate also peaked from 0.2 to 1.27µmol/l Higher productivity was observed during the present study. Average GPP increased from 0.99 to 2.9gC/m3/day and NPP from 0.51 to 1.53gC/m3/day
  49. 49. Comparison of Physico chemical parameters on south and north of TMB during 2011-2013 Parameter TMB South (2011-2012) TMB North TMB South 2012-2013 TMB North pH 7.00 7.15 6.95 7.04 Depth (m) 3.97 4.1 3.72 4.14 Transparency (m) 1.01 0.98 0.99 0.99 Temperature (0C) 28.65 29.68 29.08 28.77 Salinity (ppt) 0.79 5.65 2.45 6.11 Alkalinity (mg/l) 36.08 53.08 49.30 56.66 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) 7.49 7.72 7.57 7.66 BOD (mg/l) 3.15 2.98 2.95 2.93 GPP(gC/m3/day) 3.16 3.47 3.25 3.23 NPP (gC/m3/day) 1.36 1.63 1.49 1.29 Phyto Biomass(ml/m3) 12.94 8.35 11.38 9.23 Zoo Biomass (ml/m3) 12.9 8.25 6.93 5.78 Chlorophyll a (mg/m3) 7.20 6.08 6.93 5.78 Silicate-silicon (µmol/L) 18.95 19.72 22.96 18.96 PO4-P(µmol/L) 0.96 1.42 1.57 2.09 NH3-N (µmol/L) 7.32 6.75 4.42 5.44 NO3-N(µmol/L) 1.34 1.62 1.35 1.65 NO2-N(µmol/L) 0.16 0.35 0.16 0.31 • Salinity showed wide variation in south (av. 0.79ppt) and north of TMB (av. 6.11) • Alkalinity values showed variation between south and north of barrage. In 2011-2012, in south- 36.08mg/l & in north- 53.08mg/l • BOD values was comparatively higher in south • High concentration of NH3 was also observed in south • Zooplankton biomass as higher in south of TMB
  50. 50. Correlation Temp Salinity 0.48 Temp Total nitrogen -0.43 Temp NH4-N -0.43 pH Temp 0.33 pH Alkalinity 0.3 pH NH4-N 0.34 pH NO3-N -0.4 Conductivity Temp 0.37 Conductivity pH 0.39 Conductivity TDS 0.64 Conductivity PO4-P 0.42 CO2 Temp -0.3 CO2 Turbidity -0.4 BOD Temp 0.3 Chlorophyll a algal biomass 0.72 Chlorophyll a Phytoplankton carbon 0.78 • Spatial and seasonal interaction of PO4-Pwas significant at 1% level (F = 2.44, p < 0.01) • salinity showed an over all significance at 1% level (F = 8.9, p< 0.01). Seasonal (F = 36.07) and station wise (F = 18.06) variation of salinity were also significant at 1% level. Pearson correlation between major physico-chemical parameters • ANOVA of pH was significant at 1% level (F=2.24, p<0.01) • Seasonal variation of transparency was significant during 2011-2012 period (F=4.14) • The ANOVA of conductivity showed an overall significance at 1% level in first year (F= 6.39) and second year (F = 6.8, p < 0.01). • Based on Photosynthesis/ Respiration ratio the Vembanad wetland system is classified as autotrophic where the P/R ratio is 1.87 (heterotrophic (P/R=<1) • Annual average biomass of phyto and zooplankton was maximum during premonsoon followed by monsoon and post monsoon. The high abundance of phytoplankton in all seasons noted that the primary producers not controlled by the grazing of zooplankton Hydrodynamics of Station 10 is highly varied by change salinity, pH and alkalinity. The tidal intrusion from the Arabian sea play an important role
  51. 51. 15% 6% 79% 0% 0% 0% Phytoplankton variation in Postmonsoon CYANOPHYCE AE CHLOROPHYC EAE BACILLARIOP HYCEAE 40% 28% 32% 0% 0% Phytoplankton variation in Premonsoon CYANOPHY CEAE CHLOROPH YCEAE BACILLARIO PHYCEAE 42% 29% 27% 1% 1% Phytoplankton variation in Monsoon CYANOPHYCEA E CHLOROPHYCE AE BACILLARIOPH YCEAE • Bacillariophycea-predominant in all seasons, peaks in postmonsoon(79%). • An average of 19 species of Bacillariophyceae was observed Major Bacillariophyceae include- Biddulphia sp., Camphylodiscus sp.,Chaetoceros sp.,Coccinodiscus sp.,Cosmarium sp., Fragillaria sp., Gyrosigma sp., Leptocylindrus sp., Nitzschia sp. Pinnularia sp., Pleurosigma sp. , Rhizosolenia sp.,Skeletonema sp. Surirella sp., Tabularia sp., Thalassionema sp.,Triceratium sp. 0 50 S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 ml/m3 Station Seasonal Variation of Phytoplankton Biomass during 2011 - 2013 PRE 1 MN 1 PM 1 Gopinathan (1972) – reported 62 species of Bacillariophyceae, 24 species of Dinophyceae, 3 species of Myxophyceae and 2 species of Cilioflagellates from Vembanad backwater Unnithan et. al., 2001 observed phytoplankton biomass was maximum in premonsoon – 4.7ml/m3, followed by the post-monsoon (4. 4 ml/m3) and monsoon (3 .4 ml/ml). During the present study phytoplankton biomass was maximum in premonsoon, followed postmonsoon and monsoon in accordance to previous studies
  52. 52. Variation in major groups of phytoplankton in Vembanad lake before and after Commissioning of the TMB Chaetoceros sp. Coscinodiscus sp. Skletnonema sp. Nitzschia sp. Peridinium sp. Pleurosigma sp. Ceratium sp. Gymnodinium sp. Before TMB, Postmonsoon (Nair et al.,1975) After TMB, Postmonsoon (Unnithan et al., 2001) After TMB, Postmonsoon,2011- 2013 Spirogyra sp. Microspora sp. Botryococcus sp. Anabena sp. Lyngbya sp. Desmidium sp. Micrasterias sp. Stuarastrum sp. Spirogyra sp. Microspora sp. Microcystis sp. Pediastrum sp. Leptocylindricus sp. Zygnema sp. Ulotrix sp. Oscillatoria sp. Compared to previous studies, the dominance of Microcystis sp., Pediastrum sp., Leptocylindricus sp., Zygnema sp., Ulothrix sp., Oscillatoria sps. were increased considerably
  53. 53. Zooplankton S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 Rotifers + + + + + + + - - - Tintinids - - + + + + + + + + Cladocerans + + + + + - - - - - Polycheates - - + + + - + + + + Nematodes - + + - + + + - - + Mysids + + + - + - + + + + Zoea + + + + + - - + + + Amphipods - - + + + + - + - - Lucifer + + + + - -. - + - + Insect larve + + + + - + + - - - Calanoids + + + + + + + + + + Cyclopoids + + + - - - + + + + Fish eggs - + + + - + - + + + Fish larve + - + + + + + + + + Zooplankton distribution in Vembanad backwater during 2011-2013 0 100000 200000 300000 S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 Number/m3 Stations Seasonal density of zooplankton in Vembanad Backwater PR M MN 36% 10% 4%7%8% 1% 1% 14% 12% 2% 1% 2% 2% Percentage composition of Zooplankton of Vembanad wetland Calanoid Cyclopoid Cladocerans Rotifers Tintinids • Rotifers, Cladocerans and cyclopoids are the major groups of zooplankton (southern sector) • Zooplankton density – peaks in premosoon in most stations Calanoid copepods contributes to a major share in zooplankton composition • Calanoids -36%, followed by cladocerans-12%, rotifers 10% • Cladocerans & rotifers were abundant in southern side of TMB  Zooplankton include 14 groups in which copepods, rotifers, cladocerans , tintinids were more abundant
  54. 54. . Prebarrage phase Postbarrage phase Copepods, decapod larve, Crab zoea, Lucifers, Jelly fish, Hydromeduse, Aphipods, Cladocerans, Isopods, Cirripid nauplius, Okiopluera, Cheatognaths, Mysids, Cumaceans, Copepodites. Copepods, rotifers, Tintinids,Cladocerans, Polycheates,Amphipods, Zoea, Lucifers, Insect larve, fish larve, fish eggs, copepod naupli Dominant groups, Pillai, 1975 Copepods -major share Dominant groups, observed during present study Volumetrically abundant but limited in species composition
  55. 55. Acartia southwelli Acartia spinicauda Acartiella gravelyi Acartiella keralensis Acartia plumosa Betiolina similis Heliodiaptomus cintus Pseudodiaptomus annandeli Pseudodiaptomus binghami Pseudodiaptomus serricaudatus Ladiocerca pectinata Paracalanus indicus Paracalanus crassirostris Brachionus plicatus Brachionus ureolaris Brachionus calyciflorus Brachinus falcatus Brachionus angularis Brachionus forificula Brachionus quadridentatus Brachionus bidentata Brachionus haevensis Keratella tropica Keratella tropica assymetrica Scaphaloberis sp. Ceriodaphnia sp. Diaphanosoma sp. Bosmina sp. Eubosmina sp. List of major zooplankton species identified during the present study
  56. 56. Keratella tropica Tintinids Fish egg Polycheate larve Brachionus falcatus Bachionus havanaensis Brachionus quadridentatus Bosminia Acartiella keralensis Acartia southwelli Bestiolina similis Major zooplanktons observed during 2011-2013 Zoea
  57. 57. 36% 7% 2% 8% 16% 3% 1% 10% 4% 8% 5% Percentage abundance of calanoid copepods in north of TMB Acartia southwelli Acartia spinicauda Acartia plumosa Betiolina similis Pseudodiaptomus binghami Pseudodiaptomus serricaudatus 13% 10% 62% 5% 2% 8% Percentage abundance of calanoid copepods in south of TMB Acartiella gravelyi Acartiella keralensis Heliodiaptomus cintus Pseudodiaptomus binghami • Reduction in copepod species diversity after TMB- salinity major factor • Heliodiaptomus cinctus – species is a freshwater form dominant (62%) in southern region Acartia southwelli Acartia spinicauda Acartiella gravelyi Acartiella keralensis Acartia plumosa Betiolina similis Heliodiaptomus cintus Pseudodiaptomus annandeli Pseudodiaptomus binghami Pseudodiaptomus serricaudatus Ladiocerca pectinata Paracalanus indicus Paracalanus crassirostris Species identified during 2011-2013 Major calanoid copepods observed by Pillai et al., 1973 Acartia spinicauda, A. centura, A. erythaea, A. plumosa, A. bilobata, Acartiella gravelyi, A. keralensis, Centropages trispinosus, C. alcockii, A. furcatus, C. orisnii, Pseudodiaptomus mertoni, P. sericaudatus, P. annandeli, P. jonsei, P. binghami, Diaptomus mirabilipes, D. cinctus, Labidocerca pectinata, L. pavo, Paracalanus crassirostris, Bestiolina similis, Temora turbinata, T. discaudata Dominant forms of calanods in south- Heliodiaptomus cinctus (62%), A.gravelyi, A. keralensis etc. North -A. southwelli(36%), Paracalanus indicus, A. spinicuada etc.
  58. 58. 59 1.9% 0.1% 0.5% 0.2% 2.5% 59.8% 0.8% 0.1% 0.2% 7.1% 0.2% 2.4% 0.4% 0.1% 8.2% 15.6% Sponge Nemerteans Turbellarians Nematodes Oligochaetes Polychaetes 0.10% 0.09% 0.08% 3.56% 24.71% 0.82% 19.58% 1.78% 0.15% 0.05% 12.83% 36.08% 0.17% Sponge Turbellaria ns Nematode s Oligochaet es Polychaete s Insects Amphipod s Tanaids Percentage composition of macrofaunal groups in Vembanad estuary Polychaetes contributed by 59.8% , followed by bivalves (15.6%), isopods (8.2% ), amphipods (7.1%) and oligochaetes (2.5%) 2011-2012 2012-2013 Bivalves contributed 36.06 %, followed by polychaetes (24.69%), amphipods (19.56%) and isopods (12.82%)
  59. 59. 60 The time scale changes for the last 2-3 decades also proved that the macrofaunal community have modified and the abundance of opportunistic oligochaetes and polychaetes were more . BIOENV analysis revealed that not a single factor, a combination of bottom water pH, salinity, sediment potassium content, organic carbon, available nitrogen and sand fraction determined the abundance and distribution of macrofauna in Vembanad estuarine system. It has been confirmed that salinity, bottom water pH, silt and clay showed positive correlation with the spatial distribution of macrofauna during first year and during second year organic carbon, available nitrogen, silt fraction and bottom water pH showed strong positive correlation as observed in the results of CCA analysis. Southern zone – oligochaetes, and insects were more abundant Northern zone – Decapods, mysids, gastropods were present only here
  60. 60. 61 •Polychaete species - Namalycastis indica (34.22%), followed by Diopatra neapolitana (27.98%), Prionospio cirrifera (17.15 %), Parheteromastus tenuis (7.18 %) and Dendronereis aestuarina (6.03%) have max. % contribution Maxi. av. density of Namalycastis indica in St.2 (3131 ind./m2). Paraprionospio pinnata (av. 62 ind./m2), Dipolydora flava (av. 44 ind./m2) and Diopatra neapolitana (4137 ind./m2) obtained only in St. 10. Micronephthys oligobranchia, Sigambra parva, Cossura costa, Aphelochaeta filiformis, Scoletoma impatiens, Sabellaria pectinata and Pectinaria sp. was only in present St. 9 and 10 (max. av. density in St.10) Parheteromastus tenuis the max. av. density in St. 9 (643 ind./m2) Prionospio cirrifera - observed between St. 5 and St. 10. Its max. av. density in St. 9 (1487 ind./m2) and St. 10 (454 ind./m2). A total of 19 species of polychaetes were identified during the study period (Phylum Annelida, Class Polychaeta Orders (Phyllodocida, Capitellida, Spionida, Cossurida, Terebellida, Eunicida, Sabellida, Terebellida), 14 Family and 18 Genus)- (KX098491- Prionospio cirrifera, KX098492 - Glycera alba, KX098493 – Micronephtyis oligobranchia, KU205267 - Dendronereis aestuarina)
  61. 61. Unnithan et al., 2001 (1996-1997) 2011-2013 period Dendronereis sp., Dendronereis aestuarina, Dendronereis arborifera, Nereis chingrihattensis, Ceratonereis sp, Prionospio cirrifera and Capitellid sp. Nemalycastis indica (80%) Dendronereis aestuarina (20%) Kurian, 1972 Ansari, 1974 Pillai, 1977 Saralade vi et al., 1991 Unnitha n et al., 2001 2011- 2013 Polychaetes Polychaet es Polychaet es Polychaete s Amphipods Polychaete s Amphipods Bivalves Crustacea ns Molluscs Polychaete s Crustacean s Isopods Decapods Molluscs Amphipod s Oligochaet es Molluscs Bivalves Amphipo ds - - - Oligochaet es Gastropods - - - - Chironomi ds Sea anemone - - - - Tanaeids Prawns - - - - Nemertean s Goboid fishes - - - - Britle stars - - - - Long term changes in the macrobenthic distribution in Vembanad Variation in major Polychaete species in south of TMB  The presence of organisms such as Oligochaete, Chironomids, Tanaeids and Nemerteans were increased  Polychaete species diversity of southern sector was reduced  Polychaete sspecies in southern sector was reduced from seven to two species.  Nemalycasis indica contribute about 80% and 20% by Dendronereis aestuarina. These are associated mainly with estuarine and terrestrial nature
  62. 62. 63 Ceratonereis sp. Dendronereis aesturina Nephtys oligobranchia Prionospio cirrifera Cossura coasta Namalycastis indica Diopatra neapolitana Sigambra parva Parheteromastus tenuis
  63. 63. 64 Species (2011-2012) PRM MN PM Apseudes chilkensis 10.60 20.86 29.38 Cirolana fluviatilis 0.45 0.00 2.72 Apanthura sandalensis 7.73 6.80 11.23 Xenanthura orientalis 23.36 42.31 29.75 Mysid sp. 0.00 0.15 1.23 Cumacea sp. 0.27 0.59 0.37 Eriopisa chilkensis 5.48 6.51 12.35 Photis geniculata 46.00 5.77 3.83 Gammarus sp. 4.94 15.38 8.39 Psammogammarus sp. 1.17 1.63 0.74 Seasonal variation of Peracarid crustaceans Species (2012-2013) PRM MN PM Apseudes chilkensis 7.7 3.9 4.4 Cirolana fluviatilis 1.6 0.0 0.5 Apanthura sandalensis 4.3 10.1 4.4 Xenanthura orientalis 19.5 40.7 30.1 Mysid sp. 0.0 0.1 0.3 Eriopisa chilkensis 2.5 1.3 2.5 Photis geniculata 51.1 38.3 54.5 Gammarus sp. 12.7 5.1 3.1 Psammogammarus sp. 0.5 0.5 0.1 During first year the maximum population density during PRM (42.8 %) followed by PM (31 %) and MN (26 %). PRM season: P. geniculata (46 %) MN season : X. orientalis (42.3 %) PM season : X. orientalis (29.8 %). During second year the maximum density during PM (38 %) followed by MN (32.6 %) and PRM (29.1 %). PRM season: P. geniculata (51.1 %) MN season : X. orientalis (40.7 %) PM season : P. geniculata (54.5 %)
  64. 64. 65 Psammogammarus sp. Apanthura sandalensis Photis geniculata Xenanthura orientalis Apseudes chilkensis Gammarus sp.Cirolana fluviatilis
  65. 65. 66 1. AZTI- Marine Biotic Index (AMBI) Biotic coefficient Ecological group Benthic health Site disturbance classification 0.0 < AMBI ≤ 0.2 0.2 < AMBI ≤ 1.2 I Normal Impoverished Undisturbed 1.2 < AMBI ≤ 3.3 III Unbalanced Slightly disturbed 3.3 < AMBI ≤ 4.3 4.3 < AMBI ≤ 5.0 IV - V Transitional to pollution Polluted Moderately disturbed 5.0 < AMBI ≤ 5.5 5.5 < AMBI ≤ 6.0 V Transitional to heavy pollution Heavy polluted Heavily disturbed 6.0 < AMBI ≤ 7.0 Azoic Azoic Extremely disturbed 2. Multivariate AMBI (M – AMBI) The M-AMBI classification of reference values were ‘High’, >0.8; ‘Good’, 0.57–0.80; ‘Moderate’, 0.38–0.57; ‘Poor’, 0.20– 0.38; and ‘Bad’, < 0.20. BOPA classification Index value High (unpolluted) 0.0≤BOPA≤0.025 Good (slightly polluted) 0. 025≤BOPA≤0.13 Moderate (moderately polluted) 0. 13≤BOPA ≤0.199 Poor (heavily polluted) 0.199≤BOPA≤ 0.26 Bad (extremely polluted) 0.26≤BOPA≤0.3 3. Benthic Opportunistic Polychaetes Amphipods Index (BOPA) 4. BENTIX Bentix EQS Classification 4.5 ≤ Bentix < 6 High Normal 3.5 ≤ Bentix < 4.5 Good Slightly polluted 2.5 ≤ Bentix < 3.5 Moderat e Moderately polluted 2.5 ≤ Bentix < 2.5 Poor Heavily polluted 0 Bad Azoic
  66. 66. Fishery - Vembanad  Eighty three species of finfishes, five species of Penaeid shrimps, three species of Palaemonid prawns, two species of crabs were identified  The estimates of annual fishery production indicated an annual landing of 4387.31t, in which 480.98t and 3906.33t contributed by southern and northern zone of Vembanad  The finfishes contributed by 26.7% (1192.17t) and crustaceans contributed 73.29% to the (3195.14t)  Cichilids, Cyprinids, Mullets, Cat fishes, Ambassids, Scaenids and Half beaks were the major fin fish groups  In cichilids, Etroplus suratensis and Etroplus maqulatus formed the major fishery  Three vulnerable species- Himanitura uarnak, Horabagrus brachysoma, Hyporhampus xanthopterus Year Annual Yeild (ton) South North 1988 - 1989 504.0 6698.1 Kurup 1993 1995-1996 415.3 - CIFRI 2001 1996-1997 485.04 - CIFRI 2001 2011-2012 480.98 3906.33 MoEF 2013 Horabagrus brachysoma Hyporhampus xanthopterus Himanitura uarnak
  67. 67. 67%14% 3% 3% 2% 1% 8% 1% 1% Etroplus suratensis Etroplus maculatus Labeo dussumieri Hyporhamphus xanthopterus Megalops cyprinoides Percentage Composition of Dominant Fish Species 22% 64% 8% 6% Metapenaeus dobsoni Metapenaeus monoceros Macrobrachiu m rosenbergi Fenneropenaeu s indicus 60% 24% 7% 8% 1% Metapenaeus dobsoni Metapenaeus monoceros Macrobrachiu m rosenbergi Shellfish- Northern part of Vembanad 68 Finfish- Southern part of Vembanad Finfish- Northern part of Vembanad Shellfish- Southern part of Vembanad Macrobrachium rosenbergii contribute maximum (64%), followed by Metapenaeus dobsoni (22%) Maximum of 67% contributed by Etroplus suratensis Etroplus suratensis contribute 37% followed by Mullets (31%) and Tachysurids (20%) 37% 31% 20% 6% 6% Etroplus suratensis Mullets Tachysuridae In shell fish Metapenaeus dobsoni contribute 60% in northern part followed by Metapenaeus monoceros (24%)
  68. 68. New entrants 1995-1997 Disappeared 1995-1997 Declining production 2012-2013 Anguilla bicolor Nematolosa nasus Lates calcarifer Puntius srana Hilsa ilisha Lutjanus argentimaculatus P. filamentosus Tachysurus falcatus Chanos chanos P.mahecola Ophichtyus microcephalus Stolephorus sp Labeo dussumieri Haplochilus lineatus Leiognatus sp Labeo rohita Mugil troscheli Gerres sp nathus guintheri Eleutheronema Channa sp Clarius batracus Therapon puta Macrobrachium rosenbergii Wallago attu Lutianus johnius M. idella Ompok bimaculatus Leognathus sp Metapenaeus dobsoni Amblypharyngodon mola Gerres oblonges M. monoceros Heteropneustus fossilis Trichogaster brevirosteris Clarius batracus Palaemon carcinus Mastacembelus armatus Macrognathus guintheri Channa striatus Anabas testudineus Dynamics in fish species and production in South of barrage  Seven species of fin fish production were declined drastically  The marine and estuarine dependent species such as Lates calcarifer and Lutjanus argentimaculatus in southern part is very rare  The production of prawn species such as Macrobrachium rosenbergii, Macrobrachium idella, Metapenaeus dobsoni & . M. monoceros were reduced  The opening and closing of barrage adversely affect the migratory species  An alarming reduction of capture fishery in the Vembanad and the impact of operation of barrage on fishery was reported by Padmakumar et al., 2001
  69. 69. Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE) Southern Zone Northern Zone Amblypharyngadon microlepis Ambassis ambassis Amblypharyngodon mola Arius maculatus Anabas testudineus Arius subrostratus Channa marulius Chanos chanos Channa orientalis Cynoglossus cynoglossus Channa striatus Etroplus suratensis Etroplus maculatus Johnius coitor Heteropneustus fossilis Leiognathus brevirostris Horabagrus brachysoma Leiognathus dussumieri Hyporhampus xanthopterus Liza parsia Labeo dussumeri Mugil cephalus Puntius amphibius Paraambassis thomassi Puntius filamentous Stolephorus commersonnii Puntius melanostigma Thryssa dussumeri Puntius sarana Valamugil speigleri Macrobrachium rosnbergii Metapenaeus dobsoni Fenneropenaeus indicus Metapenaeus monoceros Most abundant fish species in Vembanad  gill net - 3.04 kg h-1  stake net - 2.43 kg h-1  Chinese dip net - 2.01 kg h-1  seines -1.2 kg h-1  cast net - 0.72 kg h-1  hook and line - 0.34 kg h-1 In the Kodungaloor – Azhikode estuary the CPUE of gillnet was 6.91kg h-1, followed by Chinese dip net (2.01kg h-1) and stake net (3.05kg h-1) (Bijoynandan et al., 2012). Decreasing CPUE denote the fishery decline in Vembanad
  70. 70. Diversity indices of finfishes in Vembanad during the study period Dendrogram – Bray-Curtis similarity index of finfishes abundance MDS– Bray-Curtis similarity index of finfishes abundance  Two separate clusters were formed for finfishes in Southern and northern zone of Thaneermukkom barrage. Shannon Weinner divesity and Margaraf richness indices increase towards northern stations  Station 1 to 3, 4 to 7 & 9 to 10 showed over all 80% similarity 1995-1996 period 2012-2013 period  Percentage contribution of Etroplus suratensis was reduced from 46.9% to 36.19%  Channa sp. reduced from 29.7% to 3.6% and Hemiramphus also reduced from 6.3% to 6%. Drastic Reduction in the Fishery production of Vembanad
  71. 71. Production trend of Macrobrachium rosenbergii over the last six decades Landings of Macrobrachium rosenbergii 1960-61 400 t Raman (1965) 1985-86 39 t Raman (1985) 1994-96 113 t Kurup (1998) 1996-97 62 t CIFRI (1997) 2012- 2013 57.69t MoEF (2013) Migration & recruitment pattern of M.rosenbergii • Disruption of physical and biological continuity with coastal waters fuelled the decline of endemic prawn M.rosenbergii, in its home ground. • Closure of the barrage during December to April for summer rice, disrupted breeding migration down stream. It prevented migration of post larvae back to home grounds - Kuttanad • Current exploited stock of M. rosenbergii from the whole lake was 57.69t • Highest catch (429 t) was recorded in 1960 (Raman, 1967) • During 1994-995 and 1995-1996 the exploited stock was 112.85t and 129.44t respectively (Kurup and Harikrishnan, 2000) • During 1995-96 and 1996-1997,the catch in the southern zone was 57.93 and 36.33t respectively (Unnithan et al., 2001) • During1999 to 2000 - 65.2 t and it reduced to 26.72t during 2000-2001 (Padmakumar, 2002)
  72. 72. Horabagrus brachysoma Labeo dussumieri Channa micropeltes Clarias dussumieri Gonoproktopterus curmuca Wallago attu Etroplus suratensis Threatened Endemics
  73. 73. • The State of Kerala leads India in the production of clams with estimated annual landings of about 66,000 tons in 2008–09 • The black clam, Villorita cyprinoides (Family, Corbiculidae) contributes 45,000 t, or about two-thirds of this total (Narasimham et al., 1993; CMFRI Annual Report, 2009). • Most of the annual production of black clams, about 25,000 t, comes from Vembanad Lake where almost 4,000 fishermen harvest them (Bijoy Nnadan, 2008) • Lake also has large sub-fossil deposits of black clam shells that are mined for commercial use • The main raw material used for cement production by TCL is lime shell, which is dredged out of Vembanad backwaters Year Live Clam Production South(%) North(%) 1988 - 1989 7025t 47.43 52.57 Kurup 1990 2011 - 2012 3800t 49 51 MoEF 2012 Clam Fishery 74
  74. 74. Meiofaunal diversity in Vembanad South of Barrage North of Barrage Meiofauna consists of Nematode (43%), Harpacticoid copepod (31%), Molluscs (15%), Polychaetes (6%)  Nematode, Herpacticoid copepod contribute 43% and 36 % in the south of barrage.  North of barrage- Nematode contribute 40%, followed by Herpacticoid copepod (35%) and Molluscs (18%)  Polychaetes in the meiofauna were young ones of polychaetes in that area
  75. 75. Composition and community structure of macro invertebrates Kole lands are considered as one of the richest community structure of macroinvertebrates. Frayer et al. (2001) estimated that 87 percent of the wetland losses from the mid-1950's to the mid-1970's were due to agricultural conversion. Insecta 64.1% Nematoda 0.1% Oligochaeta 0.2% Euhirudinea 6.5% Mollusca 5.8% Ostracoda 2.0% Branchiopoda 9.8% Isopoda 0.3% Decapoda 3.3% Arachnida 6.8% Pisces 1.0% percentage composition of macroinvertebrates Insecta Nematoda Oligochaeta Euhirudinea Mollusca Ostracoda Branchiopoda Isopoda Decapoda Arachnida Pisces Classes
  76. 76. Ephemeroptera Odonata 4X 4X 4X Caenis nigropunctata Ephimerella sp. Centroptilum sp. Ictinogomphous rapax 2X 2X 2X Crocothermis servillia Agriocnemis lacteola
  77. 77. Oriental Darter, Great Cormorant, Openbill-stork, Painted Stork,, White Necked Stork, Spotbilled Pelican Glossy Ibis, White Ibis, Lesser Whistling Teal, Cotton Teal, Gargany, Pintail Duck, Spot Billed Duck,Montagus Harrier, Steppe Eagle, Booted Eagle,Osprey,Pacific Golden Plover, Common Redshank, Green Shank, Wood Sandpiper, Common Sandpiper, Small Pratincole,Black Headed Gull, Blackwinged Stilt etc Birds Major Groups Ducks & Teals,Cormorants,Herons & Egrets, Gulls & Terns, Birds Of Prey
  78. 78. Large Egret, Ibis, Cormorant White Ibis Darter Cherakozhi Darter
  79. 79. White Breasted Kingfisher Indian Shag Lesser Whistling Teal Northern Pintail
  80. 80. Free Floating Eichhornia crassipes Salvinia molesta Pistia stratiotes Submerged Myriophyllum Elodea canadensis Hydrilla vertyicillata Shrubs/ Trees Ipomoea carnea Mimosa pigra Melaleuca quinquenervis Tamarix ramosissima Salix petiolaris Schinus terebinthifolius Triadica sebifera Common Inland Aquatic Invasive Plants Emergent/ Marsh Herbs Typha angustifolia Typha orientalis Typha x glauca Alternanthera philoxeroides Lythrum salicaria Phragmites australis Spartina anglica (S. alterniflora x maritima) Spartina densiflora Arundo donax Phalaris arundinacea Polygonum cuspidatum Juncus articulatus Impatiens glanduliflora
  81. 81. Ipomoea carnea
  82. 82. Macrophytes FAMILY SPECIES NAME G.Form stn1 stn2 stn3 stn4 stn5 stn6 stn7 stn8 Onagraceae Ludwigia sp. EA A B C Pontederiaceae Eichhornia crassipes FF A C A B Pontederiaceae Monochoria vaginalis FF A A B A Nymphaceae Nymphaea pubescens AF A A B Nymphaceae Nymphaea stellata AF A B B Menyanthaceae Nymphoides indicum EA A B C Convolvulaceae Ipomea pescapre EA A A C Convolvulaceae Convolvulus sp. EA A A A Hydrocharitaceae Hydrilla verticillata AH C A B A Lentibulariacae Utricularia aurea FS B B B A A Typhaceae Typha angustifolia EA A A A Salviniaceae Salvinia molesta FF A A B A A Parkeriaceae Ceratopteris sp. FF A A Poaceae Hygroryza aristata FF A A Scrophularaceae Lymnophyla hetrophylla AF B B A A Alimataceae Sagittaria sp. EA A A Marsileaceae Marsilea quadrifoliata EA C B Poaceae Oryza sativa WH C C C Lemnaceae Lemna sp. FF A A Amarantaceae Alternanthera sp. WH A B A frequency Class A 1-20% Class B 21-40% Class C 41-60% Macrophytes identified: 16 families and 20 sp.
  83. 83. Species of Macrophytes identified Nymphoides indicum Nymphaea pubescensNymphaea stellata EA AF AF
  84. 84. TOTAL NO OF AMPHIBIANS •In the world - 6759 1.12.10 ( •In India – 305 •In Northeast India – 105 •In Arunachal Pradesh – 62 (till last publication) Vembanad : 60 +
  85. 85. Amolops assamensis (Sengupta et al, 2008) Fejervarya pierrei (Dubois, 1975) Rhacophorous suffry (Bordoloi,Bortamuli&Ohler,2007) Limnonectes laticeps (Boulenger, 1882) Rana livida (Blyth, 1856) Polypedates leucomystax (Gravenhorst, 1829)
  86. 86. Mangroves Total No. = 4,060 species 969 floral (24% ) + 3091 fauna (76%) 8 groups of organisms exceeding 100 species No other countries in World recorded No. Groups No. of species Floral group 1 Mangrove species (True+ Associates) 130 2 Seagrass vegetation 11 3 Marine algae (Phytoplankton + Seaweeds) 559 4 Bacteria 69 5 Fungi 104 6 Actinomycetes 23 7 Lichens 32 Faunal group 8 Prawns 55 9 Crabs 139 10 Insects 711 11 Mollusks 311 12 Other invertebrates 749 13 Fish parasites 7 14 Fin fish 546 15 Amphibians 13 16 Reptiles 85 17 Birds 45 18 Mammals 71
  87. 87. MANGROVE FAUNAL DIVERSITY • Vertebrates: • Mammals: 86 spp. • Birds, 513 spp. • Reptiles, 57 spp. • Amphibians 14 spp. • Fishes, 663 spp. invertebrates: Insects: ~1415 spp. Crustaceans : 420 spp. (~280 spp. of crabs and prawns) Spiders:163 spp. Molluscs: 250 spp. Annelids (segmented worms : 271 spp. (polychaetes: 242 spp.), & Remaing other lower forms Protista: 349 spp. (unicellular organisms) Total mangrove faunal diversity: > 4580 spp. (~ 4.5 % of total 100693 spp. animal diversity recognized from India).
  88. 88. Hot spot mapping • Polychaete species in station 10 (Aroor) made it a polychaete diverse area-can be considered as an area of pollution studies • Occurrence of maximum number of 11 species • Station 8 (Varanadu) showed maximum species diversity (4.7) and richness (5.3) of fish species , made this zone a fishery diversity rich area • black clam Support a lucrative shell fishery around Pathiramanal • High concentration of total carbon and organic carbon in the southern station-hot spot for carbon dynamic studies • A good habitat was observed for fresh water zooplankton species Heliodiaptomus cinctus in the southern stations
  89. 89. Ecological decay Anthropogenic pressure on natural resources Reduction in the water spread area of Kuttanad: The water spread area of Vembanad both in terms of square area and cubic area has substantially decreased over the last 100 yearsbefore agriculture started in Kuttanad, the original expanse of Kayal was 36,329 ha; this reduced to about 23,750 ha in the year 1983. Observations in 1992 revealed only 13,224 ha and this further declined to 12,504 ha in the year 2000. The annual rate of decline during the first phase (1834-1983) was 0.23 %, which during the second phase (1983- 1992) increased to 4.93 % and to 0.68 % during the third phase (1992-2000). Similarly, the depth of the Kayal is also decreasing. Survey across selected points in the Kayal over 50 years showed that the Kayal bed is getting filled up and becoming shallower.
  91. 91. HYDROLOGIC MODIFICATIONS Ditching and draining dry up the wetlands Canals constructed for flood control, navigation, etc drain the wetlands Land clearing/land use changes and subsequent erosion – sediments increase BOD levels and change the hydrology Dams and diversions change flooding pattern and sediment transport and nutrient movement
  92. 92. Integration of complex WEB of interactions in nature and still complex WEB of human needs and values NATURAL RESOURCES RRWERESOURCES Water HUMAN NEEDS, EXPECTATIONS & VALUES Water Clothing Shelter
  93. 93. Ecosystem approach Holistic concept Bringing together two important components: Complex web of interactions in nature More complex web of interrelationships among human needs, expectations and value system Shifting Paradigms
  94. 94. Strategies: Involvement of all stakeholders Encourage public participation Raise public awareness Build capacity Develop appropriate institutional structures Shifting Paradigms
  95. 95. Threats to biodiversity Habitat destruction Pollution Species Introductions Global Climate Change Exploitation Threatened: population low but extinction less imminent Endangered: nos so low that extinction imminent
  96. 96. Regulatory Regime for Wetlands--MoEF Threats: Anthropogenic threats/ impacts to be regulated - Conversion - Pollution - Water inflow/withdrawals - Resource extraction (e.g. fishing) - Disturbance (e.g. eco-tourism) Functions: - Hydrological (ground water recharge/irrigation/flood control) - Drinking water - Fish stocks - Biodiversity conservation (both present and potential use) - Water purification Landscape aesthetics - Cultural/religious aspects Category Level of Regulation: A Centre B State C Local Body/Panchayat Need for having clear eligibility of criteria for the selection of the wetlands for the Regulatory Regime, taking into account a matrix of its functions, and biotic stresses with weight ages being assigned for these factors:
  97. 97. Gap areas • Structured data on biodiversity entities -composition ,diversity , community structure greatly lacking . National net work research programme needs to be evolved. • Multi institutional net working required • Functional role (predation, patchiness, feeding etc.) of major species to be characterized • Carbon cycling, sequestration and the energy transfer of soil fauna to be quantified and their role in regulating climate change needs to be documented. • Many species are still to be categorized under the IUCN and other status • Atlas on fauna and flora to be evolved for the respective region based on detailed studies
  98. 98. • Many species are not yet identified • Many taxonomic ambiguities need molecular approaches • Need international collaborations for improving the taxonomic studies , with inter linking of international programmes in wetland studies • Many species are loosed by pollution and other activities • Tourism and related activities are affecting the biodiversity at minute-organism level, but our studies are restricted to certain groups • A common and feasible sampling approach that includes protocols and field and laboratory guidelines for comparable standardized sampling and analysis is required for the success of a monitoring program, that is lacking in India • Ecofriendly tourism and biodiversity should be propagated