Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 December 2023 | 15(12): 24299–24320

 

ISSN 0974-7907 (Online) | ISSN 0974-7893 (Print) 

https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.7918.15.12.24299-24320

#7918 | Received 13 March 2023 | Final received 30 October 2023 | Finally accepted 13 November 2023

 

Wetland biodiversity of Ramaroshan Lake complex: a need for conservation

 

Ram Devi Tachamo-Shah 1, Deep Narayan Shah 2, Subodh Sharma 3, Lila Sharma 4, Jagan Nath Adhikari 5 & Deepak Rijal 6

 

1 Department of Life Sciences, School of Science, Kathmandu University, Dhulikhel 45200, Nepal.

1,3 Aquatic Ecology Centre, School of Science, Kathmandu University, Dhulikhel 45200, Nepal.

2 Central Department of Environmental Science, Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur, Kathmandu 44618, Nepal.

3 Department of Hydro and Renewable Energy, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee (IITR), India.

4 Forest Action Nepal, Lalitpur 44700, Nepal.

5 Department of Zoology, Birendra Multiple Campus, Tribhuvan University, Bharatpur, Chitwan, Nepal.

6 USAID Paani Program, Baluwatar, Kathmandu 44616, Nepal.

 1 ramdevi.shah@ku.edu.np, 2 dnshah@cdes.edu.np (corresponding author), 3 subodh.sharma@hre.iitr.ac.in,

4 lilanathsharma@gmail.com, 5 jnnadhikari@gmail.com, 6 rijal.deepak@gmail.com

 

 

                  Editor: Channa Bambaradeniya, Ellicott City, MD, USA.                  Date of publication: 26 December 2023 (online & print)

 

Citation: Tachamo-Shah, R.D., D.N. Shah, S. Sharma, L. Sharma, J.N. Adhikari & D. Rijal (2023). Wetland biodiversity of Ramaroshan Lake complex: a need for conservation. Journal of Threatened Taxa 15(12): 24299–24320. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.7918.15.12.24299-24320

  

Copyright: © Tachamo-Shah et al. 2023. 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: This research was funded by the USAID-Paani Program - Grant no. G-KAT-013 and G-KAT-041

 

Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

 

Author details: Ram Devi Tachamo Shah, Ph.D. is an assistant professor. She is interested in the assessment of freshwater ecosystems at spatial and temporal scales in particular macroinvertebrates, microbiota, and fish under changing environments. Deep Narayan Shah, Ph.D. is an assistant professor. His research and professional interests are freshwater ecology, wetland restorations, species distribution, and the development of bio-assessment tools. He has significantly contributed to wetland-related policy documents including management plans, strategy, and action plans. Subodh Sharma, Ph.D. is a professor. His interest lies in water quality assessment and freshwater ecology. Lilanath Sharma, Ph.D. is a vegetation ecologist and botanist. He is interested in biodiversity conservation, forest restoration, and invasive species management. Jagan Nath Adhikari, Ph.D. is an assistant professor of zoology and has a keen interest in the landscape ecology, conservation of birds, large mammals, and herpetofauna. Deepak Rijal, Ph.D. was affiliated with DAI Inc. and heads AGON Nepal. He is interested in biodiversity conservation.

 

Author contributions: RDTS: Conceptualization, designed the ecological field methods, led the field study, data curation, formal analysis, original draft, review and editing. DNS: Conceptualization, designed the ecological field methods, led the field study, formal analysis, original draft, review and editing.  SS: Conceptualization, review and editing. LS: Conceptualization and review. JNA: Conceptualization, field study, data analysis, original draft, review and editing. DR: Conceptualization and review. All authors read and approved the manuscript.

 

Acknowledgements: We would like to acknowledge the financial support of the American people for this study through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The contents of this study are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government. We also thank Dipendra Adhikari, Subarna Ghimire, Amrit Adhikari, and Suman Sapakota for their assistance in data collection. We thank Junu Maharjan for her involvement in data collection and the production of location maps used in this manuscript.

 

Abstract: The Ramaroshan Lake Complex, situated in the mid-hills of Sudurpaschim Province, is renowned for its scenic beauty, yet there is a notable dearth of information regarding its biodiversity and ecological status. This study represents the first systematic examination of seasonal variations in water quality parameters and biodiversity encompassing aquatic macroinvertebrates, fishes, birds, herpetofauna, mammals, and macrophytes, as well as the surrounding vegetation within the complex, spanning the winters and summers of 2018 and 2019. Among the twenty water quality parameters investigated, thirteen displayed significant seasonal differences across the lakes (p <0.05), with Batula and Ramaroshan lakes exhibiting elevated nutrient levels. Lamadaya Lake stood out with a highly diverse macroinvertebrate community compared to other lakes, while overall, the study recorded 45 aquatic macroinvertebrate families, three fish species, 79 bird species, 12 herpetofauna species, 12 mammal species, and 26 macrophyte species within the complex. Additionally, the surrounding vegetation comprised 193 distinct plant species. Notably, the complex currently hosts 14 IUCN Red List species, including Near Threatened (5), Vulnerable (5), Critically Endangered (1), and Endangered (3) species, as well as five migratory wetland bird species, underscoring its significance for wildlife conservation. Given the diverse and cross-cutting nature of wetlands, the development of science-based policies and coordinated efforts among central, provincial, and local governments are essential for the preservation and sustainable management of these vital ecosystems.

 

Keywords: Avian diversity, Batula Lake, biodiversity, conservation, critical habitat, herpetofauna, Jingale Lake, Lamadaya Lake, macroinvertebrates, Ramsar Site, water quality.

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION

 

Over 5% of Nepal’s land surface area is covered by natural and man-made wetlands, of which nearly 97% are contributed by rivers and irrigated paddy fields, and only 3% of the wetlands belong to marshy lands and lakes, including reservoirs and ponds (DoFD 2012). These lakes are disproportionally distributed across the varying altitudes: 51% of the lakes are situated in the high mountains above 3,000 m, 42% are located in the Tarai below 500 m, and only 7% of lakes are located in the mid-hills between 500 m and 5,000 m (Bhuju et al. 2010). Wetland ecosystems provide critical habitats to a wide range of wildlife, support livelihoods, regulate ecosystem functions, and are a source of renewable energy (Zedler & Kercher 2005; Baral 2009; Shah et al. 2011; Lamsal et al. 2014; Regmi et al. 2021a; Shrestha et al. 2021). These wetlands support critical habitats for globally threatened species (BLI 2010). Many endemic species, including two mammals (ASM 2018), one bird (BLI 2020), 10 reptiles (Uetz et al. 2018), 11 amphibians (Web 2018), 15 fish (Eschmeyer 2015), and eight flowering species, are endemic to the wetlands of Nepal. Similarly, the majority of the wetlands have socio-economic and cultural values, and riparian communities are highly dependent on wetland products (Khatri et al. 2010; Lamsal et al. 2014).

Due to the high significance of wetlands for wildlife and society, they need to be preserved and maintained. The Convention on Wetlands of International Importance is an international treaty that was signed in the city of Ramsar, Iran, on 02 February 1971, for protecting and maintaining the wetlands of ecological, botanical, limnological, hydrological, and zoological significance across the globe and designate as Ramsar Sites. The Koshi Tappu wetland was the first Ramsar Site in Nepal, designated in 1979, due to its importance for migratory birds. Since then, the government of Nepal has successfully designated a total of 10 wetlands of international importance. Among the 10 Ramsar Sites, eight are situated either in the high mountains or lowland Tarai, while only two are located in the mid- hills though the region covers over 40% of the total land surface.

Most of the wetlands, particularly in lowland Tarai, are highly threatened due to the high dependency of people on wetland products to sustain their livelihood (Sah & Heinen 2001), while wetlands situated in the inaccessible areas of mid-hills and high-mountain areas are nearly free from human pressures, hence serving as biodiversity reservoirs for many native and/or endemic species. 

Ramaroshan Lake complex, located in a unique geographic location in the mid-hills of Sudurpaschim Province of Nepal, may serve as a critical habitat for wide ranges of wildlife (DoF 2017). The lake complex is one of the major habitats of Nepal’s national bird, the Himalayan Monal Lophophorus impejanus, and a new record of a breeding site of a wetland-dependent migratory species, the Mallard Anas platyrhynchos (Aditiya Pal pers. comm. June 2019). The inlets and outlets of the lake complex are also important habitats for a globally ‘Near Threatened’ species, Epiophlebia laidlawi (Nesemann et al. 2011; Shah et al. 2012;  Deep Narayan Shah pers. comm. June 2019). Moreover, the lake complex is the source of the Kailash River, which sustains hundreds of thousands of downstream communities in the province. Many river systems of the province have been recently explored for their biodiversity across disturbance scales (Shah et al. 2020a), spatial scale along the longitudinal gradient (Shah et al. 2020b), stressor types (Sharma & Shah 2020), and microhabitats (Bhandari et al. 2018), but the lake complex has not yet been studied from the wider aspects of wetland biodiversity except for water quality and bathymetry (Chalaune et al. 2020). Therefore, a detailed scientific study of the wetland complex was felt necessary. The present study was carried out to assess and document the water quality and the extent and distribution of wetland floral and faunal diversity in the lake complex.

 

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 

Study area

The study was carried out in the four lakes of the Ramaroshan Lake complex, i.e., Ramaroshan, Batula, Jingale, and Lamadaya lakes (Figure 1; Image 1). The lake complex lies in Ramaroshan Rural Municipality in the Achham District of Sudurpaschim Province in Nepal. The rural municipality has 4,832 total households with a total population of 23,600, including 11,092 males and 12,508 females, respectively (CBS 2021). Ramaroshan is a proposed protected forest in Nepal that covers an area of 3051.29 ha for the conservation of its unique wetland ecosystem and biodiversity (DoF 2017). The ecosystems of the Ramaroshan protected forest consist of dense forest (96.95%), grassland (1.50%), lakes (1.09%), and rivers and streams (0.46%) (DFO 2019). The lake complex is the union of 12 lakes that cover an area of 30 ha (1.09%), but water remains throughout the year only in four lakes (Ramaroshan, Batula, Lamadaya, and Jingale).

 

Sampling sites

The sampling sites were distributed in all the study lakes namely Ramaroshan, Batula, Jingale, and Lamadaya (Table 1). Jingale is the largest lake among the four lakes studied. In each lake, three littoral sections were selected for the sampling of aquatic macroinvertebrates and measurements of water quality parameters. The study was conducted during the winter (November–February) and summer (May-–June) seasons of 2018 and 2019. )

 

 

Methods

 

Water quality parameters

Water quality parameters such as pH, water temperature, turbidity, dissolved oxygen (DO), electrical conductivity (EC), and total dissolved solids (TDS) were measured at three sites in each lake using a Hanna multi-parameter probe (Model: HI9829) and turbidity meter. Composite water samples were collected for the determination of total hardness, calcium hardness, magnesium hardness, total alkalinity, chloride, free carbon dioxide (CO2), calcium cations (Ca2+), magnesium cations (Mg2+), sodium cations (Na+), sulphate anions (SO42-) and analysed following APHA guidelines (APHA 2017) at the Aquatic Ecology Centre (AEC), Kathmandu University (KU). Ammonia (NH4+), ortho-phosphate (PO42-), and nitrate (NO3-) were analysed on-site using the portable HANNA photometers (Hannah Instruments HI96715C, HI96728C, and HI96717, respectively).

 

Aquatic macroinvertebrates

Aquatic macroinvertebrates were sampled from littoral sections of the lakes following Shah et al. (2015). The samples were collected from three littoral sections of each lake studied. In total, 15 macroinvertebrate samples, including one sample each from the inlet and outlet of the lake complex were collected during field visits. The samples were taken using a standard circular metallic framed hand net of mesh size 500 µm and preserved on site in 95% ethanol for further laboratory processing. The samples were processed at the Aquatic Ecology Centre (AEC) at Kathmandu University (KU). The macroinvertebrates were identified at the family level (Nesemann et al. 2007, 2011; Shah et al. 2015, 2020). The identified samples were preserved in 90% ethanol and stored at AEC, KU.

 

Fish

The passive entanglement gear technique was used for fish sampling. The fish samples were collected through gill nets placed at different parts of the lake.

Three lake sections — left bank, right bank, and center— were selected in each lake for fish sampling. At each site, two-gill nets were placed and removed every two hours. All captured individuals were taken to a nearby dry place, identified to species level (Shrestha 2019), measured, photographed, and then released back into their original habitats. Specimens that could not be identified in the field were fixed in 10% formalin for 24 hours and subsequently preserved in 70% ethanol. Voucher specimens were deposited at the National Fishery Research Centre, Godavari, Lalitpur, Nepal.

 

Bird survey

Bird surveys were conducted using the open-width point count method along transects near the lake’s shoreline, following the protocol outlined by Bibby et al. (2000). Additionally, we employed the area search method during the field study, as described by Slater (1994), Dieni and Jones (2002), and Adhikari et al. (2022). The length of each transect was determined based on the specific characteristics of the habitat and landscape, following principles outlined by Hanowski et al. (1990). Within each transect, we established a minimum of five vantage points at 100-meter intervals, where we used binoculars (Nikon 20x50) to count bird species. At each point, we conducted five-minute counts of bird species. We documented all observed species, aided by both visual and auditory observations, including relevant habitat and environmental variables. To ensure data accuracy, each transect was surveyed by two observers. Subsequently, we combined the recorded bird species lists from various vantage points within each transect. Survey periods included mornings from 600 h to 1200 h and evenings from 1500 h to 1800 h. Bird species were identified using the field guidebook for birds of Nepal authored by Grimmett et al. (2016a, b).

 

Herpetofauna

Both amphibians and reptiles were surveyed using nocturnal and diurnal and transects respectively in a   time-constrained visual encounter survey (Khatiwada 2012; Khatiwada et al. 2016; Khatiwada et al. 2019). Transects were searched by four people for two hours using torches, walking at a slow pace at night (700 h – 900 h) and during the day (1000 h– 1300 h). The number of species and individuals encountered in each transect was recorded along with all habitat and environmental variables. Apart from nocturnal and diurnal transects, opportunistic random surveys were also carried out to document the occurrence of herpetofauna species in the area. All individuals encountered were captured and stored in a 15 L plastic bucket with small holes in the lid. Some uncaptured individuals were also counted. All captured individuals were taken to a nearby dry place where the animals were measured and identified at the species level based on guide books: Schleich & Kästle (2002) and Shah & Tiwari (2004), and then released back into their original habitats. Male frogs were identified based on secondary sexual characteristics in the presence of black pigment on the throat (vocal sac) and nuptial pads, and females by the enlargement of the coelomic cavity in gravid individuals. Specimens that were difficult to identify based on morphological traits in the field were euthanized in a chlorobutanol solution, fixed in formalin for 24 hours, and subsequently preserved in 75% ethanol. The morphological parameters (e.g., body length, fin length, and eye diameter) were measured and compared with identification keys. The species nomenclature follows Frost (2019). Voucher specimens were stored at the Central Department of Zoology, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal.

 

Mammal survey

Five systematic transects (varying from 0.42 to 1.5 km) were laid in the riparian areas. The transect line was searched by 2-3 people, and all the animals sighted and indirect signs of mammals such as scats, pellets, droppings, dung, pugmarks, scrapings, carcasses, quills, and burrows were recorded. Apart from these, an opportunistic survey was also conducted around the lake to record mammals.

 

Macrophytes and vegetation survey

Macrophytes and vegetation were surveyed in and around the lake to enumerate the checklist of plant species. Surveying along line transects starting from shore to the lake interior is a flexible method to document macrophytes in small lakes (Titus 1993). We used two 25 m long-line transects from Lake Shore to the centre and noted the macrophytes at different distances.  A floating tube was used to swim, and a rake was used to collect submerged macrophytes.  

A vegetation survey in the surrounding forests (about 100 m from the lake shore) was carried out to prepare the checklist of plants occurring in the lake complex area. Transect walks along the trails and through the forest were performed to collect plant specimens.

Collected specimens were identified on-site, while unidentified specimens were preserved following standard herbarium methods (Bridson & Forman 1999). Herbarium specimens prepared for further identification were deposited at the National Herbarium and Plant Laboratory in Kathmandu. Plants were identified using relevant identification keys (Polunin & Stainton 1984; Grierson & Long 1983, 2001).

 

Data analysis

The Nepal Lake Biotic Index (NLBI) for lakes and the Biotic Index (Shah et al. 2020c) for running waters (inlet and outlet) were calculated by assigning tolerance scores to macroinvertebrates identified at the family level (Shah et al. 2011, 2020c). In these methods, the index value is the sum of the tolerance scores divided by the number of scored taxa for a site, which then translates to the lake water quality class (LWQC) for indicating the degree of degradation).

Non-metric Multidimensional Scaling (NMDS): Non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) was performed to cluster sites based on macroinvertebrate abundance data. Prior to analysis, macroinvertebrate abundance data were transformed to log (x+1). The Bray-Curtis distance measure was employed in NMDS, and the analysis was conducted using the R package (R Core Team 2019).

 

Shannon diversity index (H) The Shannon diversity index (H) was used to assess species diversity within a community (Shannon 1948):

Shannon Index (H) = - ∑pi In pi

Where pi is the proportion (n/N) of individuals of one particular species found (n) divided by the total number of individuals found (N),

ln is the natural log, 

Σ is the sum of the calculations,

 

Community Diversity Measurement - Simpson Index (D): The Simpson index was determined to measure community diversity in relation to habitats (Simpson 1949).

                                                  ∑n(n-1)

Simpson Index (D) = 1- (–––––––––)

                                                            N(N–1)

Where n is the number of individuals of one particular species,

N is the total number of individuals found.

Σ is the sum of the calculations. 

D values range between 0 and 1.

 

Evenness and Equitability: Evenness (e) was used to determine the distribution of individuals of a taxon in a community. It is constrained between 0 and 1.0:

Evenness = H’/Hmax            

Where H’ is the Shannon diversity index

Hmax is the maximum taxon recorded at a site.

 

Jacob’s Equitability index: Jacob’s Equitability (J) was used to measure the evenness with which individuals are divided among the taxa present.

Equitability (J) = H’/lnS

Where H’ is Shannon’s index of diversity,

S is the number of taxa

 

Fisher’s Diversity Index: Fisher’s index describes the mathematical relationship between the number of species and the number of individuals in those species (Fisher & Yates, 1943). The Fisher diversity index is defined implicitly by the formula below:

Fisher’s diversity index

Where n is the number of individuals and a is Fisher’s alpha).

 

 

RESULTS

 

Water quality parameters

Most of the water quality parameters except pH, free CO2, Mg hardness, Ca hardness, potassium cations, and sulphate anions significantly varied between seasons across lakes (Table 2).  For each lake, the water temperature was the single parameter that varied significantly in each study lake between seasons. Seasonal variation was recorded for electrical conductivity (86.86±4.93│75.23±5.53, p <0.001), ammonia (0.17±0.01│0.30±0.02, p <0.01), total alkalinity (64±4.93│55.66±4.91, p <0.01), chloride (14.33±1.45│16.67±1.45, p <0.01) and sodium cations (5.2±0.26│4.46±0.12, p <0.05) in Ramaroshan lake. Dissolved oxygen (7.36±0.42│5.35±0.05, p <0.05), nitrate (6.18±0.18│7.51±0.55, p <0.05), phosphate (1.19±0.09│1.64±0.12**, p <0.01) and total hardness (101±2.08│135.33±3.17, p <0.01) were different between seasons for Batula lake. Ammonia (0.28±0.03│0.34±0.03, p <0.05) and Mg hardness (18±2.64│18±1.52, P <0.001) were different between seasons for Jingale lake. TDS (49±7│36±3, p <0.01), turbidity (2.3±0.49│2.7±0.41, p <0.01), DO (2.3±0.49│2.7±0.41, p <0.01), Mg hardness (15±1.52│14±2, p <0.05) and sodium cations (5.33±0.14│4.3±0.20, p <0.01) were significantly different between seasons for Lamadaya lake.

 

Biodiversity survey

Aquatic macroinvertebrates

A total of 45 families belonging to 14 orders of macroinvertebrates were recorded in the study lakes including the inlet and outlet of the Ramaroshan Lake complex (Supplementary 1). Diptera was the most dominant and diverse order followed by Odonata and Mollusca in the lakes, while Trichoptera was the most dominant and diverse order followed by Diptera and Ephemeroptera in running waterbodies (inlet and outlet streams) of the lakes (Figure 2). Plecoptera was found only in Lamadaya Lake and running water bodies. Among lakes, Lamadaya was found to be highly diverse in terms of taxa composition, while Ramaroshan was the least diverse. Family richness ranged from 10 to 25 in the lakes, and 14 to 30 in running waterbodies. Family richness was low for the winter season compared to the summer season in the lakes and running water bodies (Figure 2)

The lakes were categorized into a ‘fair’ LWQC for both seasons while the water quality class for running water bodies was categorized into a ‘good’ status for winter and a ‘fair’ status for the summer season in the outlet (Figure 3).

Non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) disentangled sites into three clusters- Cluster 1 representing sites of running water bodies, Cluster 2 for sites of Lamadaya, and Cluster 3 for sites of the remaining three lakes (Figure 4).

 

Fish

Altogether, three species of fish, namely Schizothorax nepalensis, S. richardsonii, and Garra gotyla, belonging to the Cyprinidae family, were recorded in the lakes of Ramaroshan Lake Complex. Among these reported species, S. nepalensis listed as Critically Endangered, which is endemic to northwest Nepal (Regmi et al., 2021b), and S.  richardsonii which is common to major river systems (Koshi, Gandaki, and Karnali), is listed as a vulnerable category in the IUCN Red List.

 

Bird survey

In total, 1018 individuals (winter = 611 and summer = 423) of birds from 79 species belonging to 33 families and 15 orders were documented in the lake complex (Supplementary 2). The abundance of birds was significantly higher in the winter season than in the summer season (t = 2.81, p < 0.01), but the species richness was higher in summer (n = 73) than in winter (n = 67). Of them, four species: Neophron percnopterus (Egyptian Vulture), Ciconia episcopus (Asian Wollyneck), Catreus wallichii (Cheer Pheasant), and Vanellus vanellus (Northern Lapwing) have been listed as Endangered, Vulnerable and Near Threatened, respectively in the IUCN Red List. The most abundant species were from the order Passeriformes for the summer (66.90%) and winter (64.84%) seasons (Figure 5).

A total of 15 species of wetland birds (winter – 14, and summer - 15) were recorded from the lakes of the Ramaroshan complex, followed by 37 forest birds (winter - 30, summer - 35), 16 open area and grassland-dependent birds (winter -14, summer -13), and 9 bush birds (winter - 9, summer - 10) (Figure 6). The study reported winter migratory birds such as the Eurasian Coot (Fulica atra), Little Grebe (Tachybaptus ruficollis), Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos), Eurasian Wigeon (Anas Penelope) and Common Teal (Anas crecca).

There was no significant variation in the Shannon diversity index, Species dominance index, and Simpson index of diversity for birds between winter and summer seasons (Table 3; p = 0.79). The species’ evenness of birds (0.82) and Jacob’s coefficient of equality (0.95) were lower in winter than in the summer season (evenness = 0. 80, Jacob’s coefficient of equality = 0.95).

 

Herpetofauna

Within the lake complex, a comprehensive survey documented a total of 121 amphibians, representing 7 distinct species distributed across 5 families. Notably, Nanorana legibii dominated the population at 50.4%, followed by Duttaphrynus himalayanus at 32.2% and Hoplobatrachus tigerinus at 5.8% (Figure 7). Two endemic amphibian species, Nanorana minica and Amolops marmoratus, were also identified at the study sites (Table 4). It is worth highlighting that both Liebiegi’s Paa Frog Nanorana legibii and Small Paa Frog Nanorana minica are categorized as globally Vulnerable on the IUCN Red List. Furthermore, the Indian Bull Frog Hoplobatrachus tigerinus, classified as globally Near Threatened by the IUCN in 2021, was also observed within the lake complex.

A total of five species of reptiles were recorded during the field survey. Among them, Laudakia tuberculata (48%) was the most abundant species in the study area, followed by Calotes versicolor (25%), and Eutropis carinata (21.4%), respectively (Table 4).

 

Mammals

This study documented a total of 12 mammal species. Notably, four of these species enjoy legal protection under the DNPWC Act of 1973, enforced by the government of Nepal. These protected species include the Leopard Panthera pardus, the Red Panda Ailurus fulgens, the Asiatic Black Bear Ursus thibetanus, and the Himalayan Goral Naemorhedus goral. The Red Panda is of particular concern as it holds the classification as being ‘Endangered’ according to the IUCN Red List. Similarly, the Himalayan Black Bear and Leopard are categorized as ‘Vulnerable’ under the IUCN Red List, while the Assam Macaque and Himalayan Goral fall within the ‘Near Threatened’ category (Table 5).

 

Macrophytes and Vegetation Survey

In total, the lakes of the Ramaroshan Lake complex harbored 25 species, encompassing 14 families of macrophytes (Table 6). Predominantly, Scirpus compressus, Scirpus sinensis, and Polygonum hydropier thrived as major emergent plants along the shores and in marshy areas. Among submerged vegetation, Ceratophyllum demersum and Potamogeton nutans prevailed. The complex featured Nelumbo nucifera as the sole-rooted floating macrophyte species. Additionally, the region supported two wetland-dependent plants, Allium waalichina and Ophioglossum nudicaule, esteemed for their medicinal attributes and utilized as vegetables by the local populace.

Expanding the scope, the Ramaroshan Lake complex area showcased an impressive biodiversity of 167 plant species, spanning 70 families (Supplementary 3). Notably, Rosaceae stood out as the largest family with 17 species, followed closely by Asteraceae with 14 species and Poaceae with 13 species. Taxus wallichiana, a valuable medicinal plant, flourished abundantly within the complex area. It’s worth mentioning that this species holds a spot on the IUCN Red List as endangered and is also listed in CITES Appendix III.

 

 

Discussion

 

Ramaroshan Lake complex is known for its unique landscape and high biodiversity. The lake complex provides forest resources such as fodder for livestock and bamboo and firewood for household consumption  in adjacent communities. The complex is an excellent area for livestock grazing. Local inhabitants obtain water for drinking purposes, domestic consumption, and irrigation. Like other wetlands in Nepal, the lake complex is also affected by land encroachment. In 30 years, the wetland area of the complex has shrunk by 16% due to land use and land cover changes (Paudel et al. 2022).

 

Water quality status

Ramaroshan Lake complex, being situated in the remote mid-hills of the country, has water quality parameter values for all four lakes within the permissible limit for the winter and summer seasons (see Table 2). Dissolved oxygen (DO) for all four lakes was greater than 5 mg/L, indicating good status for maintaining higher forms of aquatic life in water (Bozorg-Haddad et al. 2021). DO was highest in Lamadaya lake (6.35 mg/L) and lowest in Batula lake (5.26 mg/L). Similar DO values were also reported from the lake complex for the winter season in 2020 (Chalaune et al. 2020) and were comparable with the DO values recorded in other lakes of the region (Gurung et al. 2018). DO greater than 4 mg/L is suitable for bathing, aquaculture, and irrigation (Bozorg-Haddad et al. 2021).

Lamadaya Lake unlike other lakes, had many physical parameters that were significantly different. This might be due to its smaller size, being relatively shallow, and being surrounded by dense forest. Hydrological fluctuation between seasons might have played a major role in making it different (Regmi et al. 2021a).  Similarly, Ramaroshan Lake and Batula Lake being situated in the lower region of the lake complex, the nutrient parameters such as nitrate and phosphate; hardness, and alkalinity were found to be high compared to Jingale and Lamadaya lakes.

 

Biodiversity 

Ramaroshan Lake complex is situated in the temperate zone, low species richness can be expected in comparison to lowland Tarai because species richness declines with increasing elevation in the Himalayas (Shah et al. 2015; Basnet et al. 2016; Araneda et al. 2018).

 

Aquatic macroinvertebrates

Water quality is a crucial parameter that determines biotic community composition in lake environments. We observed significant changes in water quality parameters across the lakes (Table 2), and this could be a key factor for the differences in the composition of macroinvertebrates between Lamadaya and the other lakes (Figure 3, 4). Warm water-adapted macroinvertebrates of insect orders Odonata, Coleoptera, and Hemiptera, together with annelid worms and Mollusca were diverse and abundant in lakes during the summer season (Figure 3). These findings are similar to the findings for tropical lakes (Shah et al. 2011; Shrestha et al. 2021). Diverse macroinvertebrates were recorded in Lamadaya Lake which might be due to the occurrence of mosaic habitats mainly comprised of soft substrates like leaf litters, twigs, and macrophytes. Soft substrates not only provide suitable habitats for macroinvertebrate colonization but also prevent predation (sensu Shah et al. 2011).

 

Fishes

The lake complex highlights its importance as a critical habitat for critically endangered fish species: Snow Trout Schizothorax nepalensis and vulnerable fish species (Schizothorax richardsonii).

 

Birds

The Ramaroshan Lake Complex plays a pivotal role in providing a crucial habitat for bird diversity, as evident from Supplementary 2. A notable highlight is the documented presence of the globally endangered vulture species Neophron percnopterus, the Egyptian Vulture, underscoring the complex’s significance. This mountainous ecosystem serves as a sanctuary for globally threatened vulture species, with a majority (7 out of 9) choosing mountain cliffs and towering trees for nesting (DeCandido et al. 2012). Notably, this study reveals that 8.9% of the bird species documented in Nepal, amounting to 891 species according to DNPWC and BCN 2019, find a habitat in the Ramaroshan Lake complex. In Nepal, approximately 200 wetland bird species have been recorded (BCN 2018), with 15 of them (7.5%) also making their presence known in the Ramaroshan Lake complex. It’s worth noting that the winter season sees a decline in the sighting of wetland birds, likely attributed to the sub-zero temperatures during this period (DFO 2019).

 

Herpetofauna

Ramaroshan Lake complex is rich in herpetofauna diversity. A total of 7 species of frogs and 5 species of reptiles were recorded during this study, which is 12.5% (out of 56) and 4.5% (out of 117 species) of the total species recorded from Nepal, respectively (Shah & Tiwari 2004a). High altitude supports a low number of herpetofauna as they are cold-blooded animals (Khatiwada et al. 2019). 

Among the recorded amphibian species, Liebiegi’s Paa Frog Nanorana legibii and Small Paa Frog Nanorana minica are listed under the globally vulnerable category, while the Indian Bullfrog Hoplobatrachus tigerinus is listed as a globally near threatened species. Studies have shown that frogs are an important source of livelihood for many people (Khatiwada & Haugaasen 2015) and remain an integral part of local medicinal heritage (Mohneke et al. 2011; Lynch et al. 2023). Amphibians and reptiles have long been used by humans as food and medicine (Gonwouo & Rödel 2008; Khatiwada & Haugaasen 2015). Local people in the Ramaroshan areas use Paha frogs (Nanorana and Amolops species) as food and medicines. Over-collection of the species may lead to local extinctions or severe population declines. As many amphibian species predictably aggregate for reproduction or hibernation, this makes them particularly vulnerable to intensive collecting efforts. Recent studies have indicated that commercial or subsistence harvesting has contributed to a decline in many reptile species (Webb et al. 2002). Khatiwada & Haugaasen (2015) revealed that Paa and Amolops are the most exploited frog species by the local people for food and medicinal purposes in mountainous parts of Nepal. This heavy exploitation may also lead to local or global declines and even extinctions through unsustainable collection (Warkentin et al. 2009).

 

Mammals

The mammals in the Ramaroshan lakes area were reported based on signs and direct sightings, and 12 species of mammals were reported during the field study. Among the reported species, one is endangered, two are vulnerable, and two are near threatened mammals, according to the IUCN Red List. Nepal supports 212 species of mammals (Amin et al. 2018), but this small area alone supports 12 species of mammals thus highlighting the importance of the Ramaroshan Lake complex for mammal conservation.

 

Macrophytes and Vegetation

This study significantly expanded upon the existing knowledge of the area’s flora by documenting a total of 26 macrophyte species, thus surpassing the previously reported count of 10 wetland species (Paudel & Pandey 2016). Furthermore, compared to an earlier study (DoF 2017) that documented only 124 plant species within the lake complex (see Supplementary 3), our research uncovered additional plant species. It’s worth noting that there is a limited body of research assessing macrophytes in the mid-hills (Basnet et al. 2016), Churia, and Tarai regions of Nepal (Regmi et al. 2021a). For instance, Basnet et al. (2016) identified fewer than 10 macrophytes in Rara Lake, located in the High Mountain region. In contrast, the wetlands of the Tarai-Plain, as highlighted by Regmi et al. (2021a) and Burlakoti & Karmacharya (2006), hosted over 50 macrophyte species. This observation suggests a pattern of increasing macrophyte species richness from the high mountain to the lowland Tarai regions. Despite its location in the mid-hill region, the Ramaroshan Lake Complex exhibited a modest richness of macrophytes. Additionally, the presence of terrestrial flora, including endangered species like Taxus wallichiana, contributes to the overall biodiversity of the lake ecosystem. It’s important to note that our vegetation survey was exploratory, and further extensive sampling in both forests and lakes may reveal more plant species.

 

Threats to the Ramaroshan Lake Complex

The lake complex is a tourist destination for local people in the district. However, the area is not as well visited by domestic or international tourists as other lakes in Nepal, such as Gosaikunda, Rara Taal, Pokhara Lake Clusters, etc., due to poor road and air connectivity despite its beautiful landscape. Therefore, minimum tourist influences and minimum activities can be seen. However local people visit the areas frequently for fodder collection, and they use the lake complex for grazing their livestock. Some of the local people are often sighted poaching birds such as the Kalij Pheasant Lophura leucomelanos for meat consumption (Aditiya Pal pers. comm. June 2019). Local people harvest Paha frogs (Nanorana and Amolops species) in large quantities for food and medicinal purposes, which may affect the population of the species in the near future. Plastic pollution is increasing in the littoral sections of the lakes

 

Conservation value of Ramaroshan Lake Complex

The Ramaroshan Lake Complex and its surrounding catchment area are home to a multitude of species with significant conservation value. These include various aquatic macroinvertebrates such as the Relict Himalayan Dragonfly Epiophlebia laidlawi, fish species like Schizothorax nepalensis and Schizothorax richardsonii, bird species including the Egyptian Vulture Neophron percnopterus, Asian Woolly-necked Ciconia episcopus, Cheer Pheasant Catreus wallichii, and Northern Lapwing Vanellus vanellus, frog species such as Liebiegi’s Paa Frog Nanorana legibii, Small Paa Frog Nanorana minica, and Indian Bull Frog Hoplobatrachus tigerinus, as well as mammal species including Royle’s Pika Ochotona roylei, Assam Macaque Macaca assamensis, Himalayan Goral Naemorhedus goral, Leopard Panthera pardus, Himalayan Black Bear Ursus thibetanus, and Red Panda Ailurus fulgens. The lake systems are encompassed by pasturelands, expansive grasslands, and dense forests that further support a diverse range of wetland-dependent and forest birds. Given its unique geographical location, suitable wetland habitat, native biodiversity, and essential ecosystem services, the Ramaroshan Lake Complex meets the criteria for designation as wetlands of international importance (Ramsar Site). It is imperative that the Ramsar focal agency for Nepal actively pursue this designation.

With the country’s adoption of a federal structure, there exist opportunities to integrate wetland management considerations by formulating regulatory frameworks at the central, provincial, and local levels. To ensure the sustainable management of these wetlands, it is crucial to engage and incorporate local communities into this regulatory framework. This approach will facilitate timely monitoring, restoration efforts, and the judicious utilisation of wetland resources.

 

 

Table 1. Geographical locations and morphometric features of the study lakes.

Lakes

Latitude

Longitude

Altitude (m)

Core area (ha)

Maximum Length & depth (m)

Ramaroshan

29.230936

81.461270

2,340

2.18

120 m and 2 m

Batula

29.230451

81.467531

2,405

3.20

130 m and 8 m

Jingale

29.233852

81.468570

2,430

21.50

300 m and 12 m

Lamadaya

29.238693

81.481549

2,545

1.12

100 m and 6 m

 

 

Table 2. Mean and standard values of physico-chemical parameters for each study lake for the winter and summer seasons of year 2018 and 2019. Values indicated in bold digits are significant between seasons. The symbols (Asterisks) “*”, “**” and “***” represent significance levels at 0.05, 0.01, and <0.001.

 

Parameters/Lakes

Across lakes

Winter│ Summer

Lamadaya

Winter│ Summer

Jingale

Winter│ Summer

Batula

Winter│ Summer

Ramaroshan

Winter│ Summer

1

pH

8.36±0.42│ 8.57±0.48

8.66±0.26│ 8.77±0.35

8.68±0.14│ 8.69±0.32

8.82±0.15│ 8.46±0.21

8.03±0.27│ 8.36±0.31

2

Temperature (°C)

16.08±1.76│ 23.98±2.11***

13.86±0.20│ 22.27±0.56**

15.23±0.26│ 21.92±0.36**

17.16±0.40│ 25.35±0.43**

18.06±0.26│ 26.37±0.39***

3

TDS

47.08±9.23│ 38.75±10.64*

49±7│ 36±3**

56.33±5.48│ 43.66±12.12

36.66±0.88│ 37.33±2.02

46.33±3.17│ 38±5.50

4

Turbidity (NTU)

2.97±1.06│ 3.62±1.28**

2.3±0.49│ 2.7±0.41**

4.06±0.29│ 5.36±0.46

2.93±0.42│ 3.02±0.32

2.6±0.81│ 3.4±0.62

5

DO

7.49±0.67│ 80.37±13.73***

8.13±0.17│ 6.36±0.33**

7.73±0.12│ 6.80±0.50

7.36±0.42│ 5.35±0.05*

6.73±0.29│ 5.82±0.33

6

EC (µS/cm)

88.49±14.86│ 80.37±13.73*

88.03±4.23│ 71.33±2.58

107.06±7.03│ 98.41±5.95

72±1.89│ 76.52±6.97

86.86±4.93│ 75.23±5.53**

7

Free CO2

3.43±1.32│   3.14±0.85

4.06±0.98│ 3.8±0.20

3.56±0.81│ 3.06±0.18

3.83±0.75│ 3.66±0.47

2.26±0.24│ 2.03±0.23

8

Nitrate (mg/L)

2.87±2.83│ 3.42±3.49**

0.12±0.02│ 0.10±0.3

0.28±0.08│ 0.21±0.06

6.18±0.18│ 7.51±0.55*

4.9±0.13│ 5.86±0.23

9

Ortho-phosphate (mg/L)

1.27±0.19│ 1.48±0.21***

1.41±0.12│ 1.36±0.14

1.12±0.01│ 1.41±0.08

1.19±0.09│ 1.64±0.12**

1.35±0.13│ 1.53±0.14

10

Ammonia (mg/L)

0.19±0.11│ 0.27±0.14*

0.21±0.11│ 0.36±0.11

0.28±0.03│ 0.34±0.03*

0.08±0.02│ 0.09±0.02

0.17±0.01│ 0.30±0.02**

11

Total Alkalinity (mg/L)

55.08±17.93│ 48.05±16.09**

27.66±2.40│ 24.33±4.33

59±2.3│ 57±5.50

69.66±3.28│ 55.22±5.07

64±4.93│ 55.66±4.91**

12

Mg Hardness

19.58±7.93│ 20.08±8.36

15±1.52│ 14±2*

18±2.64│ 18±1.52***

29.33±4.91│ 31.22±3.84

16±4.04│ 17±4.58

13

Ca Hardness

57.83±13.75│ 74.66±20.06**

42.33±1.20│ 55.33±2.40

53.33±4.63│ 73.33±2.90

71.66±6.93│ 104±7

64±5.56│ 66±4.35

14

Total Hardness (mg/L)

77.41±16.83│ 94.75±26.15***

57.33±2.02│ 69.33±3.52

71.33±2.02│ 91.33±1.85

101±2.08│ 135.33±3.17**

80±2.30│ 83±2.64

15

Chloride (mg/L)

11.75±4.82│ 13.5±5.16***

5±0.57│ 6.33±1.20

16.33±1.45│ 18±3

11.33±1.20│ 13±2

14.33±1.45│ 16.67±1.45**

16

Calcium cations (mg/L)

15.64±3.87│ 15.79±3.51

9.98±0.89│ 10.74±0.89

18.36±1.94│ 17.47±0.77

17.53±0.55│ 18.61±1.24

16.7±0.75│ 16.33±1.20

17

Magnesium cations (mg/L)

3.13±0.88│ 3.25±0.90

1.89±0.11│ 1.96±0.23

3.33±0.34│ 3.60±0.36

3.56±0.43│ 3.66±0.14

3.76±0.17│ 3.76±0.42

18

Potassium cations (mg/L)

1.80±0.60│ 1.72±0.53

1.73±0.35│ 1.5±0.30

1.63±0.08│ 1.6±0.11

2.6±0.25│ 2.43±0.20

1.26±0.08│ 1.36±0.17

19

Sodium cations (mg/L)

5.16±0.46│ 4.36±0.42***

5.33±0.14│ 4.3±0.20**

4.7±0.34│ 3.93±0.18

5.43±0.14│ 4.76±0.24

5.2±0.26│ 4.46±0.12*

20

Sulphate anions (mg/L)

0.80±0.67│ 0.63±0.53

0.13±0.01│ 0.12±0.02

1.6±0.40│ 1.2±0.36

1.02±0.14│ 0.90±0.11

0.46±0.12│ 0.3±0.05

 

 

 

Table 3. Bird’s diversity and dominance indices in Ramaroshan Lake Complex.

Metrics/Seasons

Winter

Summer

Average

Lower

Upper

Average

Lower

Upper

Shannon diversity index (H)

4.01

3.93

4.01

4.06

3.96

4.07

Species dominance index (D)

0.02

0.02

0.02

0.02

0.02

0.02

Simpson index of diversity (1-D)

0.98

0.98

0.98

0.98

0.98

0.98

Evenness (E)

0.82

0.76

0.82

0.80

0.72

0.80

Equitability (J)

0.95

0.93

0.95

0.95

0.92

0.95

Fisher diversity index (S)

19.19

19.19

19.19

25.44

25.44

25.44

 

 

Table 4. List of the herpetofauna recorded in the study transect. LC—Least Concern | NT—Near Threatened | VU—Vulnerable.

Types

Common name

Scientific name

Habitat type

IUCN Red List status

 

Amphibian

Marbled Cascade Frog

Amolops marmoratus (Blyth,1855)

River bank

LC

Himalayan Toad

Duttaphrynus himalayanus (Gunther, 1864)

Lake edge

LC

Indian Bull Frog

Hoplobatrachus tigerinus (Daudin, 1802)

Lake edge

NT

Myanmar Pelobatid Toad

Megophyrus parva (Boulenger, 1893)

Grassland

LC

Liebiegi's Paa Frog

Nanorana legibii (Gunther, 1860)

River bank

VU

Small Paa Frog

Nanorana minica (Dubois, 1975)

Lake edge

VU

Common Indian Tree Frog

Polypedates maculatus (Gray, 1830)

Lake edge

LC

Reptile

Common Garden Lizard

Calotes versicolor versicolor (Daudin, 1802)

River bank

LC

Himalayan Rock Lizard

Laudakia tuberculata (Hardwicke & Gray, 1827)

Lake edge

LC

Bengal Monitor

Varanus bengalensis (Daudin, 1802)

Lake edge

LC

Common Indian Skink

Eutropis carinata (Schneider, 1801)

Lake edge

LC

Mountain Keelback

Amphiesma platyceps (Blyth, 1854)

Lake edge

LC

 

 

Table 5. List of threatened mammals recorded from the Ramaroshan Lake Complex. LC—Least Concern | NT—Near Threatened | VU—Vulnerable | EN—Endangered.

 

Order

Family

Common name

Scientific name

IUCN Red List status

1

Rodentia

Hystricidae

Indian Crested Porcupine

 Hystrix indica

LC

2

Lagomorpha

Ochotonidae

Royle's Pika

 Ochotona roylei

LC

3

Carnivora

Canidae

Golden Jackal

Canis aureus

LC

4

Rodentia

Hystricidae

Malayan Porcupine

Hystrix brachyura

LC

5

Primates

Cercopithecidae

Assam Macaque

Macaca assamensis

NT

6

Primates

Cercopithecidae

Rhesus Macaque

Macaca mulatta

LC

7

Cetartiodactyla

Cervidae

Northern Red Muntjac

Muntiacus vaginalis

LC

8

Cetartiodactyla

Bovidae

Himalayan Goral

Naemorhedus goral

NT

9

Carnivora

Felidae

Leopard

Panthera pardus

VU

10

Primates

Cercopithecidae

Nepal Grey Langur

Semnopithecus schistaceus

LC

11

Carnivora

Ursidae

Himalayan Black Bear

Ursus thibetanus

VU

12

Carnivora

Ailuridae

Red Panda

Ailurus fulgens

EN

 

 

Table 6. List of macrophytes species according to their types in the lakes of Ramaroshan Lake Complex for summer 2019.

 

Family

Scientific name

Types

1

Brassicaceae

Barbarea intermedia

Amphibious

2

Caryophyllaceae

Stellaria aquatica

Emergent

3

Ceratophyllaceae

Ceratophyllum demersum

Submerged

4

Characeae

Chara sp.

Submerged

5

Cyperaceae

Cyperus compressus

Amphibious

6

Cyperaceae

Scirpus sinensis

Emergent

7

Hydrocharitaceae

Hydrilla verticillata

Submerged

8

Juncaceae

Juncus articulates

Amphibious

9

Juncaceae

Juncus leucanthus

Amphibious

10

Plantaginaceae

Plantago aquatica

Emergent

11

Poaceae

Alopecurus geniculatus

Amphibious

12

Poaceae

Echinochloa crus-galli

Amphibious

13

Poaceae

Eleocharis congesta

Amphibious

14

Poaceae

Eragrostis sp.

Amphibious

15

Polygonaceae

Persicaria barbata

Emergent

16

Polygonaceae

Persicaria capitata

Emergent

17

Polygonaceae

Persicaria posumbu

Emergent

18

Polygonaceae

Polygonum hydropiper

Emergent

19

Potamogetonaceae

Potamogeton filiformis

Submerged

20

Potamogetonaceae

Potamogeton nutans

Submerged

21

Potamogetonaceae

Potamogeton crispus

Submerged

22

Ranunculaceae

Caltha scapose

Emergent

23

Ranunculaceae

Ranunculus trichophyllus

Submerged

24

Typhaceae

Typha angustifolia

Emergent

25

Zygnemataceae

Spirogyra sp.

Submerged

 

 

For figures & images - - click here for full PDF

 

 

References

 

Adhikari, J.N., B.P. Bhattarai      & T.B. Thapa      (2018). Diversity and conservation threats of water birds in and around Barandabhar corridor forest, Chitwan, Nepal. Journal of Natural History Museum 30: 164-–179.  https://doi.org/10.3126/jnhm.v30i0.27553

Adhikari, J.N., J.R. Khatiwada, D. Adhikari, S. Sapkota, B.P. Bhattarai, D. Rijal & L.N. Sharma (2022). Comparison of bird diversity in protected and non-protected wetlands of western lowland of Nepal. Journal of Threatened Taxa 14(1): 20371–20386. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.7452.14.1.20371-20386

American Society of Mammalogists (2018). Mammal Diversity Database. Living National Treasures. https://www.mammaldiversity.org/.

Amin, R., H.S. Baral, B.R. Lamichhane, L.P. Poudyal, S. Lee, S.R. Jnawali, K.P. Acharya, G.P. Upadhyaya, M.B. Pandey, R. Shrestha, D. Joshi, J. Griffiths, A.P. Khatiwada & N. Subedi (2018). The status of Nepal’s mammals. Journal of Threatened Taxa 10(3): 11361–11378. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.3712.10.3.11361-11378

APHA (2017). Standard Method for the Examination of Water and Waste Water, 24th Edition. American Public Health Association. New York, ‎1516 pp.

Araneda, P., W. Sielfeld, C. Bonacic & J.T. Ibarra (2018). Bird diversity along elevational gradients in the Dry Tropical Andes of northern Chile: The potential role of Aymara indigenous traditional agriculture. PLoS ONE 13(12): e0207544. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0207544

Baral, H. (2009). Updated status of Nepal’s wetland birds. Banko Janakari 19(3): 30–35. https://doi.org/10.3126/banko.v19i3.2209.

Basnet, R., D. Luintel, K. Bhattarai, M. Joshi & K. Sapkota (2020).Wetland flora of Betkot lake, far western Nepal. Journal of Natural History Museum 30: 2016–18. https://doi.org/10.3126/jnhm.v30i0.27558

Basnet, T.B., M.B. Rokaya, B.P. Bhattarai & Z. Munzbergova (2016). Heterogeneous  landscapes on  steep  slopes at  low  altitudes as  hotspots of  bird  diversity in a  hilly  region of Nepal in the Central Himalayas. PLoS ONE 11: e0150498. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0150498 

BCN (2018). Status of Birds of Nepal. Bird Conservation Nepal, Kathmandu. Retrieved from https://www.birdconservationnepal.org/

BCN (2020). Birds of Nepal. Retrieved from https://www.birdlifenepal.org/birds/status-of-birds

Bhandari, A.R., U.R. Khadka & K.R. Kanel (2018). Ecosystem   services in the mid-hill forest of western Nepal:  a case of Panchase Protected Forest. Journal of Institute of Science and Technology 23(1): 10–17. https://doi.org/10.3126/jist.v23i1.22146

Bhandari, B., R.D.T. Shah & S. Sharma (2018). Status, distribution and habitat specificity of benthic macro-invertebrates: a case study in five tributaries of Buddhiganga river in western Nepal. Journal of Institute of Science and Technology 23(1): 69–75. https://doi.org/10.3126/jist.v23i1.22198

Bhuju, U.R., M. Khadka, P.K. Neupane, & R. Adhikari (2011). A Map based inventory of lakes in Nepal. Nepal Journal of Science and Technology 11: 173–180. https://doi.org/10.3126/njst.v11i0.4141

Bibby, C.J., N.D. Burgess, D.A. Hill & S. Mustoe (2000). Bird census techniques. Elsevier.

BirdLife International (2010). Lists of Globally Threatened and Near-Threatened Species in Nepal.

BirdLife International (2020). Handbook of the Birds of the World and BirdLife International digital checklist of the birds of the world. Version 5. Available at: http://datazone.birdlife.org/userfiles/file/Species/Taxonomy/HBW-BirdLife_Checklist_v5_Dec20.zip.

BirdLife International (2021). Species factsheet: Neophron percnopterus. Downloaded from http://www.birdlife.org on 31/12/2021.

Bozorg-Haddad, O., M. Delpasand & H.A. Loáiciga (2021). Water quality, hygiene, and health. Economical, Political, and Social Issues in Water Resources. 217-257. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-90567-1.00008-5

Bridson, D. & L. Forman (1999). IUCN Redlist Data Book (3rd edition), IUCN. http://www.iucnredlist.org.

Burlakoti, C. & S.B. Karmacharya (2006). Quantitative analysis of macrophytes of Beeshazar Tal, Chitwan, Nepal. Himalayan Journal of Sciences 2(3): 37–41. https://doi.org/10.3126/hjs.v2i3.229

CBS (2021). National Population and Housing Census 2021 (National Report), 01, NPHC 2021.

Chalaune, T.B., A. Dangol, J. Sharma, & C.M. Sharma (2020). First results on physico-chemical status and bathymetry of lakes in Ramaroshan Wetland, Far-West Nepal. Nepal Journal of Environmental Science 8(1): 17–27.  https://doi.org/10.3126/njes.v8i1.34464

Colwell, R.K., C. Rahbek & N. Gotelli (2004). The mid-domain effect and species richness patterns: what have we learned so far? The American Naturalist 163: 3–23.  https://doi.org/10.1086/382056

DeCandido, R., T. Subedi & D. Allen  (2012). Jatayu: the vulture restaurants of Nepal. Birding Asia 17: 49–56.

Del Hoyo, J., N.J., C. and International, B. (2016). Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World. Living National Treasures 2.

DFO (2019). Ramaroshan: A brief Introduction. In A. Division Forest Office (eds.), Division Forest Office Achham and Ramaroshan rural municipality 4 pp.

DoF (2017). Wetlands of Western Nepal: A brief profile of Selected Lakes. Department of Forests, Babarmahal, Kathmandu, Nepal, Babarmahal, Kathmandu, Nepal.

Directorate of Fisheries Development (2012). Annual Progress Report 2011. Kathmandu, Nepal: DoFD

Dieni, J.S. & S.L.J. Jones (2002). A Field Test of the Area Search Method for Measuring Breeding Bird Populations (Una prueba de campo del metodo de” búsqueda de. Journal of Field Ornithology 73(3): 253–257. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4131101

DNPWC & BCN (2019). An official checklist of the birds. Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation, Bird Conservation Nepal.

DNPWC (2020). Sukla Phanta National Park. Retrieved from www.dnpwc.gov.np

Eschmeyer, W.N., R. Fricke, & R. van der Laan (eds.) (2015). Catalog of Fishes: Genera, Species, References. The freshwater fish lists are based on an electronic version Living National. http://lntreasures.com/nepalff.html.

Fisher, R.A. & F. Yates (1943). Statistical tables: For biological, agricultural and medical research. Second edition. Oliver and Boyd Ltd, London.

Frost, D.R. (2019). Amphibian Species of the World: an Online Reference. Version 6.0. Retrieved from http://research.amnh.org/herpetology/amphibia/index.html

Gonwouo, L. & M. Rödel (2008). The importance of frogs to the livelihood of the Bakossi people around Mount Manengouba, Cameroon, with special consideration of the Hairy Frog, Trichobatrachus robustus. Salamandra 44(1): 23–34.

Grierson, A.J.C. & D.G. Long (eds.) (1983–2001). Flora of Bhutan. Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh and Royal Taxus wallichiana

Grimmett, R., C. Inskipp & T. Inskipp (2016 a). Birds of the Indian Subcontinent: India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh and the Maldives. Bloomsbury Publishing.

Grimmett, R., C. Inskipp, T. Inskipp & H.S. Baral (2016b). Birds of Nepal: Revised Edition. Bloomsbury Publishing.

Gurung, S., A. Gurung, C.M.  Sharma, I. Jüttner, L.  Tripathee, R.M. Bajracharya, N.  Raut, P. Pradhananga, B.K. Sitaula, Y. Zhang, S. Kang & J. Guo (2018). Hydrochemistry of Lake Rara: A high mountain lake in western Nepal. Lakes & Reservoirs: Science, Policy and Management for Sustainable Use 23(2): 87–97. https://doi.org/10.1111/lre.12218

Hanowski, J.M., Niemi, G.J., & Blake, J.G. (1990). Statistical Perspectives and Experimental Design When Counting Birds on Line Transects. The Condor 92(2): 326–335. https://doi.org/10.2307/1368230

IUCN (2004). A Review of the Status and Threats to Wetlands in Nepal, IUCN Nepal. Kathmandu, Nepal

Khatiwada, J.R. & T. Haugaasen (2015). Anuran species richness and abundance along an elevational gradient in Chitwan, Nepal. Zoology and ecology 25: 110–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/21658005.2015.1016775

Khatiwada, J.R. (2012). Amphibian species richness and composition along an elevational gradient in Chitwan, Nepal. (Master Thesis), Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Aas, Norway.

Khatiwada, J.R., S. Ghimire, S. Paudel Khatiwada, B. Paudel, R. Bischof, J.P. Jiang & T. Haugaasen (2016). Frogs as potential biological control agents in the rice fields of Chitwan, Nepal. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 230: 307–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2016.06.025

Khatiwada, J.R., T. Zhao, Y. Chen, B. Wang, F. Xie, D.C. Cannatella & J. Jiang, J. (2019). Amphibian community structure along elevation gradients in eastern Nepal Himalaya. BMC Ecology 19(1): 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12898-019-0234-z

Khatri, T.B., D.N. Shah, R.D.T. Shah & N. Mishra (2010). Biodiversity of Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve: a post flood assessment. Journal of Wetlands Ecology 4: 69–82.

Lamsal, P., K.P. Pant, L. Kumar & K. Atreya (2014). Diversity, Uses, and Threats in the Ghodaghodi Lake Complex, a Ramsar Site in Western Lowland Nepal. Hindawi 680102.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/680102

Lynch, A. J., S. J. Cooke, A.H. Arthington, C. Baigun, L. Bossenbroek, C. Dickens, I. Harrison, I. Kimirei, S.D. Langhans, K.J. Murchie, J.D. Olden, S.J. Ormerod, M. Owuor, R. Raghavan, M.J. Samways, R. Schinegger, S. Sharma, R.-D. Tachamo-Shah, D. Tickner & S.C. Jähnig (2023). People need freshwater biodiversity. WIREs Water 10(3): e1633; https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1633

Mammalogists, A. S. O. (2018). Mammal Diversity Database. Living National Treasures.

Mohneke, M., A.B. Onadeko & M.O. Rödel (2011). Medicinal and dietary uses of amphibians in Burkina Faso. African Journal of Herpetology 60: 78–83 78-83.

Nesemann, H., R.D.T. Shah & D.N. Shah (2011). Key to the larval stages of common Odonata of Hindu Kush Himalaya, with short notes on habitats and ecology. Journal of Threatened Taxa 3: 2045–2060

Nesemann N., S. Sharma, G. Sharma, S.N. Khanal, B. Pradhan, D.N. Shah & R.D. Tachamo (2007). Aquatic Invertebrates of the Ganga River System (Mollusca, Annelida, Crustacea [in part]), Volume 1.

Paudel, H.R. & T.R. Pandey (2017). Documentation of the Flora of Ramaroshan Wetland Complex, Achham, West Nepal. Bul. Dept. Pl. Res. N. 38. Department of Plant Resources, Kathmandu, Nepal, 16–21p.

Paudel, J., L. Khanal, N. Pandey, L.P. Upadhyaya, C.B. Sunar, B. Thapa, C.R. Bhatta, R.R. Pant & R.C. Kyes (2022). Determinants of Herpetofaunal Diversity in a Threatened Wetland Ecosystem: A Case Stdy of the Ramaroshan Wetland Complex, Western Nepal. Animals 13: 135; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13010135

Polunin, O. & A. Stainton  (1984). Flowers of the Himalaya. Oxford University Press, New Delhi.

Poupkou, A., P. Zanis, P. Nastos, D. Papanastasiou, D. Melas, K. Tourpali & C. Zerefos (2011). Present climate trend analysis of the Etesian winds in the Aegean Sea. Theoretical and Applied Climatology 106(3): 459-472; https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-011-0443-7

R Core Team (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.

Regmi, T., D.N. Shah, T.M. Doody, S. Cuddy & R.D. Tachamo Shah (2021a). Hydrological alteration induced changes on macrophyte community composition in sub-tropical floodplain wetlands of Nepal. Aquatic Botany 173: 103413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquabot.2021.103413

Regmi, B., M.R. Douglas, D.R. Edds & M.E. Douglas (2021). Geometric morphometric analyses define riverine and lacustrine species flocks of Himalayan snowtrout (Cyprinidae: Schizothorax) in Nepal. Aquatic Biology 30:  19–31.

Sah, J.P. & J.T. Heinen (2001). Wetland resource use and conservation attitudes among indigenous and migrant peoples in Ghodaghodi Lake area, Nepal. Environmental Conservation 28(4): 345–356. 345-356 345–356. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892901000376

Schleich, H.H. & W. Kästle (2002). Amphibians and reptiles of Nepal: Biology, Systematics, Field Guide. Gantner Verlag K. G, Koenigstein, Germany. 1211 pp.

Shah D.N., R.D. Tachamo Shah & B.K. Pradhan (2011). Diversity and Community Assemblage of Littoral Zone Benthic Macroinvertebrates in Jagadishpur Reservoir. Nepal Journal of Science and Technology 12: 211–219.

Shah D. N., S. Sharma & R.D. Tachamo-Shah (2015). Rapid assessment of biodiversity, benthic macroinvertebrates. In Gopal, B. (eds) Guidelines for Rapid Assessment of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services of Wetlands, Version 1.0. Asia-Pacific Network for Global Change Research (APN-GCR), Kobe, Japan, and National Institute of Ecology, New Delhi. 134 pp.

Shah, K.B. & S. Tiwari (2004). Herpetofauna of Nepal.  The World Conservation Union (IUCN), Kathmandu, Nepal, 237 pp.

Shannon, C.E. (1948). Mathematical Theory of Communication. The Bell System Technical Journal 27: 379–424.

Sharma S., & R.D.Tachamo-Shah (2020). Major stressors influencing the river ecosystems of Far and Mid-Western Development Regions of Nepal. Current World Environment 14 (2): 231.

Shrestha S., R.D. Tachamo Shah, T.M. Doody, S. Cuddy & D.N. Shah (2021). Establishing the relationship between benthic macroinvertebrates and water level fluctuation in subtropical shallow wetlands. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 193 (534).

Shrestha, T.K. (2019). Ichthyology of Nepal (Second ed.). Kathmandu: Binita Shreatha Publiation.

Simpson, E.H. (1949). Measurement of diversity. Nature163, 688 (1949). https://doi.org/10.1038/163688a0

Slater, P.J.  (1994). Factors affecting the efficiency of the area search method of censusing birds in open forests and woodlands. Emu-Austral Ornithology  94(1): 9–16.

Smith, F.A., A.G. Boyer, J.H. Brown, D.P. Costa, T. Dayan, S.K. Ernest & M.D. Uhen (2010). The evolution of maximum body size of terrestrial mammals. Science 330(6008): 1216–1219;  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1194830

Shah, R.D.T., S. Sharma & L. Bharati (2020a). Water diversion induced changes in aquatic biodiversity in monsoon-dominated rivers of Western Himalayas in Nepal: Implications for environmental flows. Ecological Indicators 108: 105735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105735

Shah, R.D.T., S. Sharma, D.N. Shah & D. Rijal (2020b). Structure of Benthic Macroinvertebrate Communities in the Rivers of Western Himalaya, Nepal. Geosciences 10 (4).

Shah, R.D.T., S. Sharma, P. Haase, S. Jähnig & S. Pauls (2015). The climate sensitive zone along an altitudinal gradient in central Himalayan rivers: a useful concept to monitor climate change impacts in mountain regions. Climatic Change. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-015-1417-z

Shah, R.D.T., D.N. Shah & S. Domisch (2012). Range shifts of a relict Himalayan dragonfly in the Hindu Kush Himalayan region under climate change scenarios. International Journal of Odonatology. https://doi.org/10.1080/13887890.2012.697399

Shah, R.D.T., D.N. Shah & H. Nesemann (2011). Development of a macroinvertebrate-based Nepal Lake Biotic Index (NLBI): an applied method for assessing the ecological quality of lakes and reservoirs in Nepal. International Journal of Hydrology Science and Technology 1:125–146.

Shah, R.D.T., D.N. Shah & S. Sharma (2020). Rivers Handbook-A guide to the health of rivers in the Hindu-Kush Himalaya. Aquatic Ecology Centre, School of Science, Katmandu University. 130 pp.

Titus, J.E. (1993). Submersed Macrophyte Vegetation and Distribution Within Lakes: Line Transect Sampling, Lake and Reservoir Management 7(2): 155–164. https://doi.org/10.1080/07438149309354267

Uetz, P., P. Freed & J. Hošek (2018). The Reptile Database. Living National Treasures.

USAID (2010). A Climate Trend Analysis of Kenya—August 2010. USGS and USAID.

Warkentin, I.G., D. Bickford, N.S. Sodhi & C.J. Bradshaw (2009). Eating frogs to extinction. Conservation Biology 23: 1056–1059; 1056-1059; https://www.jstor.org/stable/29738845.

Web, A. (2018). Amphibian web. Living National Treaures.

Webb, J.K., B.W. Brook & R. Shine (2002). Collectors endanger Australia’s most threatened snake, the broad-headed snake Hoplocephalus bungaroides. Oryx 36: 170–181.

Wikipedia (2020). District Profile: Achham. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achham_District.

Zedler, J.B. & S. Kercher (2005) Wetland resources: status, trends, ecosystem services, and restorability. Annual Review of Environmental Resources 30: 39–74: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.30.050504.144248