Journal of Threatened Taxa |
www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 October 2021 | 13(12): 19743–19752
ISSN 0974-7907 (Online) | ISSN 0974-7893
(Print)
https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.7532.13.12.19743-19752
#7532 | Received 21 June 2021 | Final
received 14 August 2021 | Finally accepted 20 August 2021
Evaluation of fish diversity and
abundance in the Kabul River with comparisons between reaches above and below
Kabul City, Afghanistan
Ugyen Kelzang
1, Ahmad Farid Habibi 2 &
Ryan J. Thoni 3
1 Forest Research Institute
(Deemed to be University), Kaulagarh Road, PO.
I.P.E., Dehradun, Uttarakhand 248195, India.
1 Present address: Ministry of
Health, P.O. Box: 726, Lhado Lam, Kawajangsa,Thimphu,
Bhutan.
2 Faryab
University, Faryab Province, Afghanistan.
3 Feather River College, 570
Golden Eagle Avenue, Quincy, CA 95971, United States.
1 ugyen.kelzang@gmail.com
(corresponding author), 2 faridhabibi558@gmail.com, 3 ryan.thoni@slu.edu
Editor: J.A. Johnson, Wildlife Institute
of India, Dehradun, India. Date of publication: 26
October 2021 (online & print)
Citation: Kelzang,
U., A.F. Habibi & R.J. Thoni (2021).Evaluation of fish diversity and
abundance in the Kabul River with comparisons between reaches above and below
Kabul City, Afghanistan. Journal of
Threatened Taxa 13(12): 19743–19752. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.7532.13.12.19743-19752
Copyright: © Kelzang
et al. 2021. Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License. JoTT allows unrestricted use, reproduction, and
distribution of this article in any medium by providing adequate credit to the
author(s) and the source of publication.
Funding: The Rufford
Foundation provided funding
support to carry out this research project (Grant Application ID: 27579-1).
Competing interests: The authors
declare that they have no known competing financial interests or
personal relationships that
could have appeared to influence the
work reported in this article.
Author details: Ugyen Kelzang is a conservation enthusiast and
working on the conservation and management of aquatic biodiversity in Bhutan.
He studied MSc environment management and BSc Sustainable Development. He is
currently employed as a project officer at the Ministry of Health of
Bhutan. Ahmad
Farid Habibi is a lecturer at Faryab
University in Afghanistan. His research interests include the conservation of
freshwater biodiversity, environmental education, and disaster management. Ryan J.
Thoni is an ichthyologist specializing in
studying the diversity and evolution of Himalayan fish fauna. His research
spans the Himalayas with a strong focus on Bhutan, Nepal, and the Tien Shan
Range in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan.
Author contributions: UK performed a compilation of
data, analysis, interpretation, and wrote the first draft of the manuscript.
AFH did all fieldwork like field sampling and field data collection. RJT
reviewed and edited the first draft of the manuscript. All authors reviewed and
incorporated all the comments received from the reviewers and incorporated them
in the manuscript. Before submitting, all authors read and approved the final
version of the manuscript.
Acknowledgements: The authors are thankful to the Rufford Foundation for granting Rufford
Small Grants (Grant Application ID: 27579-1) to initiate and implement this
research project.
Abstract: The fish fauna of the Kabul River
downstream of the City of Kabul face threats from increasing human population
such as pollution, overfishing, and increased development. Despite the rapid
increase of these activities leading to threats to fishes in the Kabul River,
no studies have examined the changes in diversity, distribution, and abundance
of fish fauna in the Kabul River surrounding of Kabul City. In this study, the Kabul River was divided
into two zones (upstream and downstream) consisting of six sampling sites (3
sites per zone). Of the total of 1,190 fishes collected, Cypriniformes
was the dominant order with one family, six genera, and eight species. Cyprinidae was the dominant family of that order with 81.4%
(n= 969) of total individuals. Species abundance was higher in the
upstream reaches in almost all analyses. Upstream sites recorded 11 species,
while seven species were recorded from downstream sites. Fish species richness
was significantly higher upstream versus downstream reaches (9.67 ± 1.53
vs. 6.33 ± .58; U= .00, z= -1.99,
p= .04, r= .81). Species diversity upstream was significantly higher
than downstream (H’= 1.90 ± 0.15, D1= 0.81 ± 0.02).
Similarly, species evenness was also higher upstream than downstream (J’=
0.84 ± 0.01). Low diversity, abundance, and evenness in downstream reaches are
likely due to anthropogenic activities affecting the river in and around Kabul
City.
Keywords: Anthropogenic, diversity indices,
native species, pollution, species composition.
Introduction
Fishes are the most diverse and
abundant group of vertebrates in the world (Powers 1989; Ravi & Venkatesh
2008), making up nearly 50 % of all vertebrate diversity. Further, fishes are
important keystone species in many ecosystems and exhibit diverse behaviours
and ecologies (Spencer & King 1984; Allan 2004; Dudgeon et al. 2006; Wu et
al. 2014). They play important roles managing balanced trophic dynamics within
a system. Additionally, fishes contribute to food security throughout most of
the world, making up as much as 17 % of the world population’s protein intake
(Bennett et al. 2018) and fishing is one of the most common livelihoods
globally (FAO 2014).
An assessment done by the
International Union for Conservation of Nature (Reid et al. 2013), on more than
5,000 species, reported that freshwater fishes are the most threatened group of
vertebrates in the world. The Himalayan region holds a variety of both warm and
cold-water fishes (Jayaram 2010). Coad (2015) reported that there are 85
species of fishes belonging to 10 families in the landlocked country of
Afghanistan, however, FishBase.org (2020) reports 125 species (all freshwater
species) known to occur in Afghanistan – a gulf that reflects the paucity of
reliable data on fish diversity in Afghanistan. Though, several studies on the
fishes have been conducted throughout different regions of the Himalaya
(Vishwanath et al. 1998; Shrestha 1999; Goswami et
al. 2007; Jayaram 2010; Gurung et al. 2013; Thoni
& Gurung 2014; Gurung & Thoni 2015; Prasad et
al. 2020), in Afghanistan, such studies are very limited in scope and number,
despite the fact that several fishes found in the country are endemic and
likely threatened (UNEP 2003). In order to preserve biodiversity in a given
area, we must understand what the diversity is and how it is impacted by
different resource uses, development processes, and management strategies.
The Kabul River is home to a
diverse fish community including the globally endangered Golden Mahseer Tor putitora (UNEP 2008). The Kabul River is mainly used
for irrigation, waste disposal, watering livestock, and fishing. The river runs
through the most densely populated areas of the city. In the Kabul River, water
pollution is a significant threat to the freshwater ecosystem (Weir 2018). The
United Nations Environment Protection (UNEP 2003) reported pollution of the
Kabul River in the city of Kabul mainly by the release of industrial effluents,
domestic waste, and development activities. To date no biodiversity
indices-based research efforts on fish fauna have been carried out in
Afghanistan. Hence, this study aims to assess the diversity, distribution, and
abundance of fish fauna in the Kabul River downstream of Kabul City compared to
upstream.
Material
and Methods
Study area
This study was conducted along
reaches of the Kabul River above and below Kabul City, located at 34.542°N
68.803°E, at an elevation of 1,791 m (Figure 1). The study area was divided
into two different zones: upstream, and downstream. Three sampling sites each
from each zone were selected to sample fish (Figure 1; Table 1). Four sampling
replicates were taken in each sampling sites, keeping 400 m distance between
sampling replicates. Sites were selected to ensure that similar habitat types
were represented in upstream and downstream reaches. Fish sampling was carried
out between December 2019 to June 2020 by using nets (mesh sizes ranging from ½
inch to 2.5 inch) both in upstream and downstream reaches. We used different
mesh sizes of nets so as to minimize the bias in sampling fishes of numerous
sizes due to specific gears.
The area receives 312 mm of
precipitation on an average annually, with rarer precipitation in the summer
months (NEPA 2007). Average annual temperature of the area ranges from 4.3 °C
to 19.6 °C, with approximately 12.4 °C to 32.1 °C during summer months and -7.1
°C to 8.3 °C in winter months (Broshears et al.
2005). The area is densely populated (Mack et al. 2009), with much of the
non-wood forest product industry (mainly fruits and tree nut farming and
industry) dependent upon the Kabul River and its tributaries for the disposal
of effluents (dyes, metals, and minerals). A population of roughly 3–5 million
people live in the greater Kabul area (Barbè 2013).
Fish sampling
Using the expertise of the local
fishermen, ichthyofaunal sampling was done in the selected sampling sites.
Fishes were collected using gill nets and fish traps for two days in each
sampling site. Fishes were counted, photographed, and identified up to the
species level when possible, before being released back into the river. Species
that were not readily identified by the project team on site were photographed
and all diagnostic data required for identification were taken for further
identification and referred to available literature. Taxonomic studies of the
fish fauna collected from this study were performed following Mishra (1959),
Talwar & Jhingran (1991), Jayaram (1981, 2010),
and Coad (2014, 2015).
Analysis of data
A Mann-Whitney test, comparing
species diversity and abundance was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 23.0 to
examine differences in species abundance and diversity between upstream and
downstream locations. Dendrogram of Bray-Curtis coefficients of similarity
(Bray & Curtis 1957) and rank abundance plots of sites were generated using
BioDiversity Professional version 2.0 (McAleece 1999). As
there seems to be no single diversity index more appropriate than another
(Morris et al. 2014), several common diversity indices were tested. Shannon
diversity index (Shannon & Wiener 1949), Simpson’s diversity (Pielou 1969), Pielou evenness
index (Pielou 1975), Margalef’s richness index (Margalef 1958), Menhinick’s index
(Menhinick 1964), and Sorensen’s similarity
coefficient (Dice 1945; Sørensen 1948) were
calculated using the following formulae:
(a)
Shannon diversity index: 
where 
= the proportion of individuals belonging to the 
species.
(b)
Simpson’s
diversity: 
where = the proportion of individuals belonging to the species.
(c)
Pielou evenness index: 
where H’= Shannon diversity index; S= species richness.
(d)
Margalef’s richness index: 
where S= species richness;
N= total number of individuals.
(e)
Menhinick’s index: 
where S= species richness;
N= total number of individuals.
(f)
Sorensen's similarity coefficient: 
where C= number of species the two communities have in
common; S1= number of species in
community one; S2= number
of species in community two.
The initial data entering, data
cleaning, data coding, calculation of some descriptive analyses, and generation
of charts were conducted using Microsoft Excel 2016. The map of the study area
was produced using ArcMap version 10.5.
Results
and Discussion
Fish composition
A total of 1,190 fishes were
collected (Table 2) from the study area. Out of the total of all fishes across
both zones, 81.4 % (n= 969) of belong to the order Cypriniformes,
18.2 % (n= 216) to Salmoniformes, and 0.4 % (n= 5) to
Cichliformes (Figure 2). This is in line with the
research carried out by Saund et al. (2012) in the Mahakali River, Nepal, where they have reported Cypriniformes as the most dominant order. Studies conducted
by Shendge (2007), Aryani
(2015), and Akhi et al. (2020) have reported similar
community structures. However, the aquatic habitats of Afghanistan are less
conducive to and are geographically isolated from many of the more diverse
groups of Asian Siluriformes, resulting in our
relatively low diversity of catfishes. Cyprinids can live in cold waters,
tolerate very low oxygen levels, and exhibit a broad range of trophic guilds
(Royce 1996). Hence, combined with historical processes, they are typically
found to be more dominant in freshwater habitats throughout most of the Asian
continent.
The order of Cypriniformes
was represented by one family, six genera, and eight species. The second most
abundant order, Salmoniformes, was represented by one
family, two genera, and two species. Cichliformes was
only represented by a single species. Among families, Cyprinidae
was the most dominant within the study area, and Salmonidae was second most
dominant family. Similarly, Dau & Parkash (2009), Cunico et al.
(2011), Choubey & Qureshi (2013), Mohsin et al.
(2013), Hu et al. (2019), and Herawati et al. (2020)
reported Cyprinidae as the dominant family in regional
censuses throughout much of Asia.
Among the predominant fish
families, Cyprinidae is one of the most diverse (Boschung & Mayden 2004; Shen
et al. 2016) and pollution-disturbance-tolerant families, with more than 2,000
species and 210 genera (Barbour et al. 1999; Grabarkiewicz
& Davis 2008). Their ability to survive in unclean habitats validates their
dominance in the most polluted part of the Kabul River (Kabul city and
downstream reaches).
Species abundance
Within the upstream sites, Schizothorax sp. was highly abundant at sites
S2 (n= 76) and S3 (n= 117) followed by Schizothorax
esocinus. At S1, Oncorhynchus mykiss (n=
44) was the most abundant species, followed by S. esocinus
(n= 31) (Figure 3a). Schizothorax sp.
was the most abundant species at all three of the downstream sites (S4 n= 64,
S5 n= 52, S6 n= 87; Figure 3b). Species abundance significantly differs among
the 6 different sampling sites. Alburnoides
holciki (n= 33), Ctenopharyngodon
idella (n= 18), Cyprinus
carpio (n= 15), Hypophthalmichthys
molitrix (n= 26), Salmo trutta (n= 16),
Schizothorax esocinus (n=
70), Schizothorax sp. (n= 117), Tariqilabeo diplochilus (n=
35), Tariqilabeo sp. (n= 11),
and Coptodon zillii
(n= 4) were recorded more in S3 than in other sites.
Overall, in upstream sites, Schizothorax sp. was abundant (n= 217, 72.33
± 46.61), followed by Schizothorax esocinus (n= 148, 49.33 ± 19.60) and Oncorhynchus
mykiss (n= 103, 34.33 ± 11.93). Coptodon
zillii (n= 5, 1.67 ± 2.08) was least abundant
fish species in the upstream zone (Table 3). Likewise, in the downstream, Schizothorax sp. (n= 203, 67.67 ± 17.79) was
most abundant and Cyprinus carpio (n= 6, 2 ± 3.46) was least abundant.
Pandey et al. (2018) also found
abundance and dominance of Schizothorax spp.
in rivers in Uttarakhand, India. Similar reports on the abundance of schizothoracines were also made in the Tibetan Plateau
(Zhang et al. 2017; Ma et al. 2020). Moreover, Kabul is a cold place located at
1,791 m and Aljazeera (2012) reported -17°C at night in February. Schizothoracines are cold-water species, also living at
elevations of up to 3,323 m (Petr et al. 2002). Thus, the abundance of schizothoracines in the Kabul River is in consistence with
the other rivers of the Himalaya.
While comparing overall fish
abundance between upstream and downstream reaches, upstream (n= 744) was found
to be higher than downstream (n= 446). This result is contrary to normal
patterns of fish diversity along a river continuum (Edds
1993; Tiemann et al. 2004). In addition, the
dendrogram of Bray-Curtis coefficients of similarity in the abundance of fish
was produced. As per the cluster analysis, S2 and S6 had a parallel Bray-Curtis
similarity in their species abundance of about 83 %. Though these sites are
from different locations (upstream and downstream), the high similarity
explained between these sites is mainly due to similar level of anthropogenic
activities and pollution level. S1, S5, S3, and S2–S6 combined had a common
similarity of about 74 %, indicating similarity in species abundance (Figure
4).
Species present at the upstream
sites like Salmo trutta, Tariqilabeo
diplochilus, Tariqilabeo sp.,
and Coptodon zillii
were not recorded from the downstream sites. This is likely because of the high
intensity of ongoing habitat degradation caused by the discharge of industrial
waste and sewage directly into the river system, construction activities, and
the high density of human population and their associated anthropogenic effects
on the downstream reaches.
Native and non-native species in
sampling sites
From the total of nine species
recorded from the area (lumping Schizothorax
sp. with Schizothorax esocinus and Tariqilabeo sp.
with Tariqilabeo diplochilus),
five species were found to be native and four non-native species (Table 4).
We recorded the highest number of
native species from S3 (n= 286), followed by S2 (n= 157), and S6
(n= 140). Similarly, as shown in Table 5, non-native fish species were
recorded more in S3 (n= 84) followed by S2 (n= 83) and S6 (n=
75. The lowest number of non-native fish were found in S4 (n= 14). It
was found that almost all non-native fish species were used for aquaculture in
the area. The decrease in native species richness while moving from upstream to
downstream was also reported by Loures & Pompeu (2019). They stated that the main reason behind such
occurrence is mainly due to increase in non-native species in downstream areas.
Diversity and richness of fish
species
The high species richness in S3
and S2 were indicated by Margalef’s diversity index (DMg) (1.69 and 1.64, respectively), as
their values were higher than other sampling sites. To examine the similarity
of species richness between the sampling sites, Sorenson’s similarity
coefficient (CC) was appraised (Table 5). Sampling sites S2 & S3, S1 & S6,
S4 & S6, and S5 & S6 indicated having similarity of 95 %, 93 %, 92 %,
and 92 % between them, respectively. Sorenson’s similarity coefficient value
between S3, S4, and S5 (CC= 0.71) was the lowest, which also shows 71 % of
similarity between them.
Altogether, upstream sites
recorded 11 species while downstream
sites recorded seven species. High richness
upstream (DMn= 0.63 ± 0.05, DMg= 1.59 ± 0.15) was supported by Menhinick’s Index (DMn)
and Margalef’s diversity index (DMg).
For downstream, Menhinick’s index and Margalef’s diversity index were 0.53 ± 0.05 and 1.07 ± 0.04
correspondingly, which was considerably less than upstream (Table 6). This was
supported by Mann-Whitney test which revealed that fish richness upstream (9.67
± 1.53) and downstream (6.33 ± .58) was significantly different (U= 0.00,
z= -1.99, p= 0.04, r= 0.81) (Table 7).
Fish species diversity was
evaluated using various diversity indices. The most diverse site among all was
S3 with Shannon diversity index (H’) of 2.04 and Simpson’s diversity (D1)
of 0.83. S4 was the site with least diversity (H’= 1.12, D1= 0.57).
Similarly, species evenness was highest in S3 with Pielou
evenness index (J’) of 0.85 and lowest in S4 (J’= 0.62).
Overall, diversity of fishes was
higher in reaches of the Kabul River upstream (H’= 1.90 ± 0.15, D1=
0.81 ± 0.02) of Kabul City when compared to downstream reaches (H’= 1.36
± 0.22, D1= 0.67 ± 0.09) which was indicated both by the
Shannon diversity index and Simpson’s diversity. Likewise, species evenness was
higher in reaches upstream of Kabul City (J’= 0.84 ± 0.01) compared to
downstream reaches (J’= 0.74 ± 0.10). Previous studies have shown a
similar pattern in which reaches of rivers upstream of densely populated areas
harbour higher diversity of freshwater fishes compared to downstream (Tawari-Fufeyin & Ekaye 2007).
The higher species richness and
diversity in upstream reaches in the study area may be due to the constant flow
of the river, less modification of land use, less pollution and fewer
developmental activities. Urban activities like urban and industrial
construction leads to land use change, adding pollution and nutrients to the
river system, varying hydro-morphology and hydrologic flow regimes, and
creating unstable flow (as the valley remains dry in most of the winter months)
which negatively effects fish diversity and richness (Grimm et al. 2000; Wang
et al. 2001; Booth 2005; Walsh et al. 2005; Gebrekiros
2016).
Freshwater ichthyofauna
conservation
Afghanistan is an arid and
landlocked country (Breckle 2007; Wily 2015), but is
abundant in water resources (Qureshi 2002). However, as much as 80 % of
Afghanistan’s freshwater is contaminated and water pollution is a serious
threat to the conservation of aquatic biodiversity and human survival (Weir
2018). In Kabul City, solid waste, waste water (both domestic and industrial),
and open sewers directly drain into the Kabul River (UNEP 2003), exacerbated by
population growth (Mack et al. 2009), modifying the aquatic habitat. Habitat
quality plays a great role in the fish composition, diversity, and distribution
in any stream or river system (McClendon & Rabeni
1987; Agarwal et al. 2018). Use of agriculture pesticides, and overfishing
(Saeed 2018) are other threats to the conservation of the freshwater ecosystem
in Kabul City. This study has documented
11 fish species from the area. One species of them is listed under the IUCN Red
List of Threatened Species (Table 8). To conserve these species and other
associated species in the area, adoption of scientific fishing or sustainable
fishing methods, timely monitoring of water quality, and proper management of
solid waste and waste water are urgently recommended.
Conclusions
The Kabul River downstream of
Kabul City is threatened by numerous anthropogenic activities. The majority of
fishes recorded from the area were from the upstream sites where the aquatic
habitat was least disturbed compared to downstream sites. Intensive
agriculture, infrastructural development, and ineffective management of waste
in the downstream area increases sedimentation, contamination, and changes the
overall aquatic habitats and their function. Our study shows that species
diversity, richness, and abundance tend to decrease as we move from sites
upstream of Kabul City to sites downstream of Kabul City. Thus, implementation
of sustainable development practice is deemed essential, so as to manage the
water resources and conserve its biodiversity. Moreover, studies on
physiochemical parameters of the river, aquatic macroinvertebrates and fishes,
and their association needs to be carried out to generate additional baseline
information on the aquatic biodiversity of the area and to monitor water
quality.
Figure 1. Map of the study area showing
sampling sites, Kabul River and its tributaries, and Kabul City, Afghanistan.
|
Sampling zones |
Sampling
sites |
Geographic
coordinates |
Elevation
(m) |
|
|
Latitude (D.M.S) |
Longitude
(D.M.S) |
|||
|
Upstream |
S1 |
34.41746°N |
69.11657°E |
1,919 |
|
S2 |
34.42923°N |
69.19619°E |
1,814 |
|
|
S3 |
34.4609°N |
69.21761°E |
1,797 |
|
|
Downstream |
S4 |
34.62652°N |
69.25344°E |
1,761 |
|
S5 |
34.58567°N |
69.27003°E |
1,782 |
|
|
S6 |
34.54591°N |
69.34672°E |
1,776 |
|
Table 2. Overall fish species
composition in Kabul River under Kabul City.
|
Family |
Species |
N |
% |
|
Cyprinidae |
Alburnoides holciki |
90 |
7.6 |
|
Ctenopharyngodon idella |
54 |
4.5 |
|
|
Cyprinus carpio |
36 |
3.0 |
|
|
Hypophthalmichthys molitrix |
81 |
6.8 |
|
|
Schizothorax esocinus |
228 |
19.2 |
|
|
Schizothorax sp. |
420 |
35.3 |
|
|
Tariqilabeo diplochilus |
48 |
4.0 |
|
|
Tariqilabeo sp. |
12 |
1.0 |
|
|
Salmonidae |
Oncorhynchus mykiss |
198 |
16.6 |
|
Salmo trutta |
18 |
1.5 |
|
|
Cichlidae |
Coptodon zillii |
5 |
0.4 |
Table 3. Mean species abundance with
standard deviation at upstream and downstream sites.
|
Species |
Upstream |
Downstream |
||
|
No. of individuals |
Mean ± Standard Deviation |
No. of individuals |
Mean ± Standard Deviation |
|
|
Alburnoides holciki |
63 |
21.00 ± 10.82 |
27 |
9.00 ± 8.19 |
|
Ctenopharyngodon idella |
41 |
13.67 ± 4.04 |
13 |
4.33±2.52 |
|
Cyprinus carpio |
30 |
10.00 ± 6.24 |
6 |
2.00 ± 3.46 |
|
Hypophthalmichthys molitrix |
59 |
19.67 ± 8.50 |
22 |
7.33 ± 2.08 |
|
Oncorhynchus mykiss |
103 |
34.33 ± 11.93 |
95 |
31.67 ± 25.11 |
|
Salmo trutta |
18 |
6.00 ± 8.72 |
- |
- |
|
Schizothorax esocinus |
148 |
49.33 ± 19.60 |
80 |
26.67 ± 8.02 |
|
Schizothorax sp. |
217 |
72.33 ± 46.61 |
203 |
67.67 ± 17.79 |
|
Tariqilabeo diplochilus |
48 |
16.00 ± 17.69 |
- |
- |
|
Tariqilabeo sp. |
12 |
4.00 ± 6.08 |
- |
- |
|
Coptodon zillii |
5 |
1.67 ± 2.08 |
- |
- |
- indicates absence.
Table 4. Native and non-native fish
species recorded in different sites.
|
Species |
Occurrence |
Sampling
sites |
|||||
|
S1 |
S2 |
S3 |
S4 |
S5 |
S6 |
||
|
Alburnoides holciki |
Native |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salmo trutta |
Native |
x |
|
|
x |
x |
x |
|
Schizothorax esocinus |
Native |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tariqilabeo diplochilus |
Native |
x |
|
|
x |
x |
x |
|
Coptodon zillii |
Native |
|
x |
|
x |
x |
x |
|
Ctenopharyngodon idella |
Non-native |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cyprinus carpio |
Non-native |
|
|
|
x |
x |
|
|
Hypophthalmichthys molitrix |
Non-native |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oncorhynchus mykiss |
Non-native |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table 5. Sorenson’s similarity
coefficient (whose value ranges from 0 to 1) showing degree of similarity among
sampling sites.
|
|
S1 |
S2 |
S3 |
S4 |
S5 |
S6 |
|
S1 |
1.00 |
0.78 |
0.84 |
0.86 |
0.86 |
0.93 |
|
S2 |
|
1.00 |
0.95 |
0.75 |
0.75 |
0.82 |
|
S3 |
|
|
1.00 |
0.71 |
0.71 |
0.78 |
|
S4 |
|
|
|
1.00 |
1.00 |
0.92 |
|
S5 |
|
|
|
|
1.00 |
0.92 |
|
S6 |
|
|
|
|
|
1.00 |
Table 6. Mean ± standard deviation of
biodiversity indices for upstream and downstream sites in Kabul city.
|
Diversity Indices/
Sites |
Upstream Mean ± SD |
Downstream Mean ± SD |
|
Menhinick’s index (DMn) |
0.63 ± 0.05 |
0.53 ± 0.05 |
|
Margalef’s diversity index (DMg) |
1.59 ± 0.15 |
1.07 ± 0.04 |
|
Shannon diversity
index (H') |
1.90 ± 0.15 |
1.36 ± 0.22 |
|
Pielou evenness index (J') |
0.84 ± 0.01 |
0.74 ± 0.10 |
|
Simpson’s diversity
D1) |
0.81 ± 0.02 |
0.67 ± 0.09 |
Table 7. Mann-Whitney U test result of
species richness between upstream and downstream.
|
|
Group |
N |
Mean rank |
Mean Sum |
U |
z |
p |
r |
|
Species
richness |
Upstream |
3 |
5.00 |
15.00 |
.00 |
-1.99 |
.04 |
.81 |
|
Downstream |
3 |
2.00 |
6.00 |
|
U—Mann-Whitney U test | z—z
statistics | p—significance value | r—effect size.
Table 8. Fish species recorded from
the Kabul River in Kabul City, Afghanistan with global conservation status.
|
Species |
Conservation status |
Regional status |
|
Alburnoides holciki |
Not Evaluated |
Native |
|
Ctenopharyngodon idella |
|
Non-Native |
|
Cyprinus carpio |
|
Non-Native |
|
Hypophthalmichthys molitrix |
|
Non-Native |
|
Oncorhynchus mykiss |
|
Non-Native |
|
Salmo trutta |
Least concern |
Native |
|
Schizothorax esocinus |
Not Evaluated |
Native |
|
Schizothorax sp. |
|
Native |
|
Tariqilabeo diplochilus |
Not Evaluated |
Native |
|
Tariqilabeo sp. |
|
Native |
|
Coptodon zillii |
Least Concern |
Native |
References
Agarwal,
N.K., G. Singh, H. Singh, N. Kumar & U.S. Rawat (2018). Ecological impacts of dams on
the fish diversity of Bhagirathi River in central Himalaya (India). Coldwater
Fisheries Society of India 1(1): 74–84.
Akhi, M.M., M.A. Jewel, M.A. Haque, B.K. Sarker, M.S. Khatun,
A.K. Paul, M.S. Islam & S.K. Das (2020). Multivariate approaches to
determine the relationship between fish assemblage structure and environmental
variables in Karatoya River, Bangladesh. Community
Ecology 21: 171–181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42974-020-00015-6
Aljazeera
(2012). Afghanistan
battles against cold and snow. In: Aljazeera. Retrieved on 30 March 2020.
https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/inpictures/2012221102246504375.html
Allan, J.D.
(2004). Landscapes
and riverscapes: the influence of land use on stream ecosystems. The Annual
Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 35: 257–284. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.35.120202.110122
Aryani, N. (2015). Native species in Kampur Kanan River, Riau province
Indonesia. International Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Studies 2(5):
213–217.
Barbè, D. (2013). Population Displacement and
Urban Transition in Kabul City. Sciences Po - Fall 2013. Risk Governance in the Large
Metropolis.
Barbour,
M.T., J. Gerritsen, B.D. Snyder & J.D. Stribling (1999). Rapid Bioassessment
Protocols for Use in Streams and Wadable Rivers: Periphyton, Benthic
Macroinvertebrates and Fish, 2nd Edition. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, D.C.
Bennett, A.,
P. Patil, K. Kleisner, D.
Rader, J. Virdin & X. Basurto
(2018). Contribution
of fisheries to food and nutrition security: Current knowledge, policy, and
research. Duke University, Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy
Solutions.
Bhatt, J.P.
& M.K. Pandit (2016). Endangered Golden Masheer Tor putitora Hamilton: a review of natural history. Reviews
in Fish Biology and Fisheries 26(1): 25–38.
Booth, D.B.
(2005). Challenges
and prospects for restoring urban streams: a perspective from the Pacific Northwest
of North America. Journal of the North American Benthological
Society 24(3): 724–737.
Boschung, H.T. & R.L. Mayden (2004). Fishes of Alabama. Smithsonian Institution,
Washington, 736 pp.
Bray, J.R.
& J.T. Curtis (1957). An ordination of upland forest communities of southern Wisconsin. Ecological
Monographs 27: 325–349.
Breckle, S.W. (2007). Flora and vegetation of
Afghanistan. Basic and Applied Dryland Research 1(2): 155–194.
Broshears, R.E., M.A. Akbari, M.P. Chornack, D.K. Mueller & B.C. Ruddy (2005). Inventory of Ground-Water
Resources in the Kabul Basin, Afghanistan. U.S. Geological Survey
Scientific Investigation Report 2005.
Choubey, K. & Y. Qureshi (2013). Study of ichthyofaunal
biodiversity of Rajnandgaon town, CG, India. International Research Journal of Biological
Sciences 2(2): 21–24.
Coad, B.W.
(2014). Fishes
of Afghanistan. Pensoft Publishers, 393 pp.
Coad, B.W.
(2015). Native fish
biodiversity in Afghanistan. Iranian Journal of Ichthyology 2(4):
227–234.
Cunico, A.M., J.D. Allan & A.A. Agostinho
(2011). Functional
convergence of fish assemblages in urban streams of Brazil and the United
States. Ecological Indicators 11(5): 1354–1359.
Dau, A. & C. Parkash
(2009).
Distribution and abundance of fish populations in Herike
wetland-A Ramsar site in India. Journal of
Environmental Biology 30(2): 247–251.
Dice, L.R.
(1945). Measurement
of the amount of ecologic association between species. Ecology 26(3):
297–302.
Dudgeon, D.,
A.H. Arthington, M.O. Gessner, Z. Kawabata, D.J. Knowler, C. Lévêque, R.J. Naiman, A. Prieur-Richard, D.
Soto, M.L.J. Stiassny & C.A. Sullivan (2006). Freshwater biodiversity:
importance, threats, status and conservation challenges. Biological Reviews
81(2): 163–182.
Edds, D.R. (1993). Fish assemblage structure and
environmental correlates in Nepal’s Gandaki River. Copeia
11: 48–60.
FAO (2014). The State of World Fisheries
and Aquaculture 2014: Opportunities and Challenges. Food and Agriculture
Organization.
FishBase.org
(2020). FishBase. World Wide Web electronic publication. http://www.fishbase.org,
version (1/2020).
Freyhof, J. (2011). Salmo trutta.
In: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2011: e.T19861A9050312. Downloaded
on 20 March 2020. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2008.RLTS.T19861A9050312.en
Freyhof, J. & M. Kottelat
(2008). Cyprinus carpio.
In: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2008: e.T6181A12559362. Downloaded
on 20 March 2020. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2008.RLTS.T6181A12559362.en
Gebrekiros, S.T. (2016). Factors Affecting Stream Fish
Community Composition and Habitat Suitability. Journal of Aquaculture and
Marine Biology 4(2): 00076. https:/doi.org/10.15406/jamb.2016.04.00076
Goswami, U.C, W. Vishwanath & K.C.
Jayaram (2007). Fish fauna
of north east India: natural and anthropogenic. Natural and
Anthropogenic Hazards on Fish and Fisheries 21.
Grabarkiewicz, J. & W. Davis (2008). An introduction to
freshwater fishes as biological indicators. EPA-260-R-08-016. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental Information,
Washington, DC.
Grimm, N.B.,
J.M. Grove, S.T.A. Pickett & C.L. Redman (2000). Integrated approaches to longterm studies of urban ecological systems. BioScience 50(7): 571–584.
Gurung, D.B.,
S. Dorji, U. Tshering &
J.T. Wangyal (2013). An annotated checklist of
fishes from Bhutan. Journal of Threatened Taxa 5(14):
4880–4886. https://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.o3160.4880-6
Gurung, D.B.
& R.J. Thoni (2015). Fishes of Bhutan: a
preliminary checklist. Kuensel Corporation
Limited.
Herawati, T., M. Syaiful,
I. Bangkit, A. Sahidin, A. Yustiati, Y. Dhahiyat &
Iskandar (2020). Fish
community structure before reservoir inundation in Cipanas,
West Java. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science Vol.
535, No. 1, p. 012059. IOP Publishing.
Hu, M., C.
Wang, Y. Liu, X. Zhang & S. Jian (2019). Fish species composition,
distribution and community structure in the lower reaches of Ganjiang River, Jiangxi, China. Scientific Reports
9: 10100. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-46600-2
Jayaram, K.C.
(1981). The freshwater
fishes of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Burma and Sri Lanka. A Handbook. Zoological
Survey of India, Calcutta.
Jayaram, K.C.
(2010). Freshwater
fishes of the Indian region, 2nd edition. Narendra Pubishing House, Delhi, India.
Lalèyè, P. (2020). Coptodon
zilli. In: The IUCN Red List of Threatened
Species 2020: e.T183163A64508317. Downloaded on 20 March 2020. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2020-2.RLTS.T183163A64508317.en
Loures, R.C. & P.S. Pompeu (2019). Temporal changes in fish diversity in lotic and
lentic environments along a reservoir cascade. Freshwater Biology
64(10): 1806–1820.
Ma, Q., K.
He, X. Wang, J. Jiang, X. Zhang & Z. Song (2020). Better resolution of Cytochrome
b than Cytochrome c Oxidase Subunit I to Identify Schizothorax
Species (Teleostei: Cyprinidae)
from the Tibetan Plateau and Its Adjacent Area. DNA and Cell Biology 39(4):
579–598.
Mack, T.J.,
M.A. Akbari, M.P. Chornack, I.M. Verstraeten,
T.B. Collen & L.N. Plummer (2009). Water resources availability in
Kabul, Afghanistan: a conceptual simulation integrating climatologic,
hydrogeologic, geochemical, and remotely sensed data. Program with Abstracts.
In Second Hindu Kush Conference, Symposia and Workshops for Geoscientists,
Engineers, Planners, Archeologists and Investors (pp.
27–79).
Margalef, R. (1958). Temporal succession and spatial
heterogeneity in phytoplankton, pp. 323–347. In: Perspectives in Marine
biology, Buzzati-Traverso (ed.), University of California
Press, Berkeley.
McAleece, N. (1999). BioDiversity
Pro, Version 2.00. The Natural History Museum and the Scottish Association for
Marine Science.
McClendon,
D.D. & C.F. Rabeni (1987). Physical and biological
variables for predicting population characteristics of the small mouth bass and
rock bass in an Ozark stream. North American Journal of Fisheries Management
7: 46–56.
Menhinick, E.F. (1964). A comparison of some species
individual diversity indices applied to samples of field insects. Ecology 45:
589–861.
Mishra, K.S.
(1959). An aid to
identification of the common commercial fishes of India and Pakistan. Record
of the Indian Museum 1–4(57): 172–177.
Mohsin,
A.B.M., S.M. Haque, S.M. Galib,
F.H. Fahad, N. Chaki, N. Islam & M. Rahman (2013). Seasonal abundance of fin
fishes in the Padma River at Rajshahi district,
Bangladesh. World Journal of Fish and Marine Sciences 5(6): 680–685.
Morris, E.K.,
T. Caruso, F. Buscot, M. Fischer, C. Hancock, T.S.
Maier, T. Meiners, C. Müller, E. Obermaier, D. Prati, S.A. Socher, I. Sonnemann, N. Wäschke, T. Wubet, S. Wurst & M.C. Rillig
(2014). Choosing
and using diversity indices: insights for ecological applications from the
German Biodiversity Exploratories. Ecology and
Evolution 4(18): 3514–3524.
NEPA (2007). Afghanistan Initial National
Communication to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. National
Environmental Protection Agency, Islamic Republic of Afghanistan
Pandey, N.,
P. Kumar, S. Ali, B.K. Vishwakarma & S. Kumar (2018). Role of small tributaries in
ichthyofaunal diversity of rivers in Uttarakhand. Journal of Coldwater
Fisheries 1(1): 89–96.
Petr, T.,
D.B. Swar & S.B. Swar
(Eds.) (2002). Cold
water fisheries in the trans-Himalayan countries (No. 431). Food and
Agriculture Organization.
Pielou, E.C. (1975). Ecological Diversity. Wiley,
New York, 165 pp.
Pielou, E.C. (1969). An Introduction to
Mathematical Ecology. Wiley, New York, USA, 286 pp.
Powers, D.A.
(1989). Fish as
model systems. Science 246(4928): 352–358.
Prasad, A.,
A. Shrestha, J.H. Limbu & D. Swar (2020). Spatial and Temporal Variation
of Fish Assemblages in Seti Gandaki River, Tanahu, Nepal. Borneo Journal of Resource Science
and Technology 10(2): 93–104.
Pusey, B.J.,
D.M. Warfe, S.A. Townsend, M.M. Douglas, D. Burrows,
M.J. Kennard & P.G. Close (2011). Conditions, impacts and threats
to aquatic biodiversity. In: Aquatic Biodiversity in Northern Australia:
Patterns, Threats and Future. Charles Darwin University Press, Darwin.
Qureshi, A.S.
(2002). Water
Resources Management in Afghanistan: The Issues and Options (Vol. 49).
International Water Management Institute.
Ravi, V.
& B. Venkatesh (2008). Rapidly evolving fish genomes and teleost diversity. Current
Opinion in Genetics and Development 18(6): 544–550.
Reid, G.M.,
T.C. MacBeath & K. Csatádi
(2013). Global
challenges in freshwater-fish conservation related to public aquariums and the
aquarium industry. International Zoo Yearbook 47(1): 6–45.
Royce, W.F.
(1996). Introduction
to the Practice of Fishery Science, Revised Edition: 1st Edition. Elsevier,
448 pp. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-600952-1.X5000-2
Saeed, A.
(2018).
Overfishing, pollution and climate change have put Kabul river’s Sher Mahi fish
in trouble.
https://scroll.in/article/877676/overfishing-pollution-and-climate-change-have-put-Kabul-rivers-sher-mahi-fish-in-trouble.
Retrieved on 13 March 2020.
Saund, T.B., J.B. Thapa & H.P.
Bhatt (2012). Fish
Diversity at Pancheshwar Multipurpose Project Area in
Mahakali River. Nepal Journal of Science and
Technology 13(2): 225–230.
Shannon, C.E.
& W. Wiener (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana, University of
Illinois Press, 177pp.
Shen, Y., L.
Guan, D. Wang & X. Gan (2016). DNA barcoding and evaluation of genetic diversity in
Cyprinidae fish in the midstream of the Yangtze
River. Ecology and Evolution 6(9): 2702–2713.
Shendge, A.N. (2007). Study of fish diversity in Nira River. Journal of the Indian Fisheries Association
34: 15-19.
Shrestha, J.
(1999). Coldwater
fish and fisheries in Nepal. Fish and fisheries at higher altitude-Asia.
FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 385: 13–40.
Sørensen, T. (1948). A method of establishing groups
of equal amplitude in plant sociology based on similarity of species and its
application to analyses of the vegetation on Danish commons. The Royal
Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters 5(4): 1–34.
Spencer, C.N.
& D.L. King (1984). Role of fish in regulation of plant and animal communities in
eutrophic ponds. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences
41(12): 1851–1855.
Talwar, P.K.
& A.G. Jhingran (1991). Inland Fishes of India and
Adjacent Countries Vol-1&2. Oxford and OBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd.
Tawari-Fufeyin, P. & S.A. Ekaye
(2007). Fish
species diversity as indicator of pollution in Ikpoba
river, Benin City, Nigeria. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 17(1):
21–30.
Thoni, R.J. & D.B. Gurung (2014). Parachiloglanis
bhutanensis, a new species of torrent catfish (Siluriformes: Sisoridae) from
Bhutan. Zootaxa 3869(3): 306–312.
Tiemann, J.S., D.P. Gillette, M.L. Wildhaber & D.R. Edds (2004). Effects of Lowhead
Dams on Riffle-Dwelling Fishes and Macroinvertebrates in a Midwestern River. Transactions
of the American Fisheries Society 133(3): 705–717. https://doi.org/10.1577/T03-058.1
Turner, G.F.
(1999). What is a
fish species? Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 9(4): 281–297.
UNEP (2003). Afghanistan: Post-conflict
Environmental Assessment. United Nations Environment Program, Nairobi,
Kenya
UNEP (2008). Biodiversity profile of
Afghanistan: An output of the national capacity needs self-assessment for
global environment management (NCSA) for Afghanistan. United Nations
Environment Program, Kabul, Afghanistan.
Vishwanath,
W., W. Manojkumar, L. Kosygin & K.S. Selim (1998). Biodiversity of freshwater
fishes of Manipur, India. Italian Journal of Zoology 65(S1):
321–324. https://doi.org/10.1080/11250009809386840
Walsh, C.J.,
T.D. Fletcher & A.R. Ladson (2005). Stream restoration in urban
catchments through redesigning storm water systems: looking to the catchment to
save the stream. Journal of the North American Benthological
Society 24(3): 690–705.
Wang, L., J.
Lyons & P. Kanehl (2001). Impacts of urbanization on
stream habitat and fish across multiple spatial scales. Environmental
Management 28(2): 255–266.
Weir, D.
(2018). The slow
violence of pollution in Afghanistan. In: Conflict and Environment Observatory.
Retrieved on 15 February 2020.
https://ceobs.org/the-slow-violence-of-pollution-in-afghanistan/
Whittaker,
R.H. (1965). Dominance
and Diversity in Land Plant Communities: Numerical relations of species express
the importance of competition in community function and evolution. Science
147(3655): 250–260.
Wily, L.A.
(2015). Resolving
natural resource conflicts to help prevent war: a case from Afghanistan. Livelihoods,
Natural Resources, and Post-conflict Peacebuilding 115–137.
Wu, W., Z.
Xu, X. Yin & D. Zuo (2014). Assessment of ecosystem health
based on fish assemblages in the Wei River basin, China. Environmental
Monitoring and Assessment 186(6): 3701–3716. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-014-3651-7
Zhang, C., C.
Tong, F. Tian & K. Zhao (2017). Integrated mRNA and microRNA transcriptome analyses
reveal regulation of thermal acclimation in Gymnocypris
przewalskii: a case study in Tibetan Schizothoracine fish. PloS
one 12(10): e0186433. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186433
Zhao, H.H. (2011). Hypophthalmichthys
molitrix. In: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2011:
e.T166081A6168056. Downloaded on 20 March 2020. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2011-2.RLTS.T166081A6168056.en