Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 September 2023 | 15(9): 23879–23888

 

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

https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.8522.15.9.23879-23888

#8522 | Received 12 May 2023 | Final received 15 June 2023 | Finally accepted 06 August 2023

 

 

Faunistic overview of the freshwater zooplankton from the urban riverine habitats of Pune, India

 

Avinash Isaac Vanjare 1 , Yugandhar Satish Shinde 2  & Sameer Mukund Padhye 3

 

1 Freshwater Invertebrates Biology Laboratory, Department of Zoology, Ahmednagar College, Ahmednagar, Maharashtra 414001, India.

2 Department of Zoology, PES’s Modern College of Arts, Science and Commerce (Autonomous) Shivajinagar, Pune, Maharashtra 411005, India.

3 Biologia Life Science LLP, Savedi, Ahmednagar, Maharashtra 414003, India.

1 avinashisaac7@gmail.com (corresponding author), 2 yugandharshinde@gmail.com, 3 sameer.m.padhye@gmail.com

 

 

 

Editor: Anonymity requested.          Date of publication: 26 September 2023 (online & print)

 

Citation: Vanjare, A.I., Y.S. Shinde & S.M. Padhye (2023). Faunistic overview of the freshwater zooplankton from the urban riverine habitats of Pune, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 15(9): 23879–23888. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.8522.15.9.23879-23888

  

Copyright: © Vanjare 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: None.

 

Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

 

Author details: Dr. Avinash Vanjare is working as an associate professor in Zoology. His area of work includes freshwater invertebrates like rotifers, large branchiopods and odonates. Dr. Yugandhar Shinde is working as an assistant professor in Zoology. His expertise includes freshwater micro-crustaceans and molluscans. Dr. Sameer Padhye is working as a principal scientist at Biologia Life Science LLP. He has published 53 research articles in journals of repute and has reported many new species to science. His expertise includes biodiversity and ecology of Branchiopods and data analysis.

 

Author contributions: All the authors contributed equally to the idea, methodology, field work and analysis. AIV and SMP contributed to writing of the manuscript and its subsequent revisions

 

Acknowledgements: AIV would like to thank the principal of Ahmednagar College and the head of the Department of Zoology at Ahmednagar College for their support. SMP would like to thank the director of Biologia Life Science LLP, Ahmednagar for her support. YSS would like to thank the principal of Modern College, Shivajinagar, Pune and the head of the Department of Zoology, Modern College, Shivajinagar, Pune. Authors would also like to acknowledge the support of Jeevitnadi – Living River Foundation, Pune and Adhiwas Foundation, Pune for their support. The authors are grateful to the Maharashtra Biodiversity Board for giving permission for collection (MSBB/DESK5/Appl/NOC/CR-292/233/2016-17).

 

 

Abstract: Urbanization modifies the physical, chemical, and biological nature of all ecosystems including rivers. Such changes negatively impact all aquatic biodiversity including the freshwater zooplankton. Given the fast pace of urbanization in all the major cities across India,  the aim is to provide a faunistic overview of Rotifera, Cladocera, and Ostracoda from two polluted rivers flowing through Pune, one of the rapidly growing cities in the state of Maharashtra, India. A one-year survey of three localities on the rivers Mula & Mutha and data from published literature on another locality revealed the presence of 73 species which includes 47 rotifers, 15 cladocerans, and 11 ostracods. A higher species number of rotifers was seen at lesser polluted localities while cladocerans and ostracods occurred even in the most urbanized sampling locality. Many of the species found were commonly observed species from the region. Epizoic associations of cladocerans and rotifers and red coloration in the former group were observed during a low dissolved oxygen phase in both rivers. Such observations underscore the potential bioindicator value of these small animals to the impacts of urbanization.

 

Keywords: Biodiversity, Cladocera, Epizoic, Mula-Mutha river, Ostracoda, pollution, Rotifera, urbanization.

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION

 

Urbanization refers to the mass migration of human populations from rural to urban settings (Kuddus et al. 2020). More than half the world’s population (~4.3 billion) lives in urban areas which may increase to six billion by the year 2041 (Ritchie & Roser 2018; UNDESA 2018). Thus, urban areas, especially in developing countries like India, are expanding at an exponential rate assisted by the ever-increasing population (Henderson 2002; Cohen 2006; Onda et al. 2019; Kuddus et al. 2020). Such rapid urbanization can have adverse effects on different ecosystems by way of native species loss and/or an increase in the number of non-native species (McMichael 2000; McKinney 2002, 2006).

Rivers are an important component of many urban centres providing water, power, and means of transport besides harbouring high biodiversity (McMichael 2000; Everard & Moggridge 2012; Tran Khac et al. 2018). Many studies have shown that anthropogenic activities like modification of the river channel/bank and untreated waste disposal impact riverine biodiversity in multiple ways which include cultural eutrophication and biotic homogenization to name a few (Blair 2001; Ouyang et al. 2002; Dudgeon et al. 2006; Schindler 2012; Braghin et al. 2018; Du et al. 2023).

Freshwater zooplankton is a well-represented group of invertebrates in rivers and forms an important component of aquatic food chains (Dumont & Negrea 2002; Liu et al. 2020). Zooplankton communities respond to physical and chemical changes in the riverine habitats by displaying variations in their growth, community composition, density, diversity, and distribution (Bērziņš & Pejler 1987, 1989; Duggan et al. 2001; Nogrady et al. 1993; Hulyal & Kaliwal 2008; Jeppesen et al. 2011; Adamczuk et al. 2015; Du et al. 2023). 

Literature exists on the different limnological aspects of lotic and lentic habitats in India, though, several of them, especially in the case of zooplankton, have issues like species misidentifications (Sharma & Sharma 2021). Data from reliable studies point to species losses occurring in response to changes in environmental variables like nutrients (phosphorus and nitrogen), dissolved oxygen, turbidity and water flow (Padmavati & Goswami 1996; Arora & Mehra 2003; Rajaram & Das 2008; Padhye & Dahanukar 2015).

Pune is a rapidly growing city in India where its population has grown exponentially within the last 70 years from 3.75 lakhs (1941) to 5 million (2011) and is expected to be >9 million by 2035 (see Butsch et al. 2017; UNDESA 2018). Mula & Mutha, the two rivers that provide water to this urban centre are highly polluted within the city limits due to various anthropogenic activities (Wagh & Ghate 2008; Padhye 2020). Existing faunal literature on these rivers suggests decreasing species numbers across animal groups like odonates, molluscs, fish and birds due to this urbanization effects (Gole 1983; Kharat et al. 2001, 2003; Wagh & Ghate 2008; Kulkarni & Subramanian 2013; Kulkarni et al. 2021). Studies on zooplankton from a single locality on the Mula River have also shown a similar trend (Vanjare et al. 2010; Padhye 2020).

The present study aims to provide a faunistic overview of Rotifera, Cladocera, and Ostracoda of Mula & Mutha rivers passing through the urban part of Pune, Maharashtra.  Additionally, peculiar observations and habits of some of the species found in the study are also commented upon.

 

 

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 

Site

Mula & Mutha are tributaries of the Bhima River (Pune, Maharashtra) and are heavily polluted within the city limits, receiving large amounts of untreated waste. Both rivers originate in the Western Ghats, meet in Pune and then join the Bhima River outside the city limits. Floating vegetation (Pistia sp., Eichhornia sp., and Lemna sp.) is observed here frequently and in high densities, after post-monsoon in the urban regions while submerged (Hydrilla sp.) and emergent vegetation (Typha sp.) is also seen at many places.

Two sampling sites were selected along the Mula River (Ram-Mula confluence & Aundh Bridge) and Mutha River (Vitthalwadi & Garware College) within Pune City for the study (Figure 1). Urbanization around Ram-Mula confluence and Vitthalwadi is comparatively lower than Aundh Bridge and Garware College sites (authors pers. obs. 19 November 2017).

 

Field and laboratory work

Qualitative sampling was carried out at Ram-Mula confluence, Vitthalwadi, and Garware College between post monsoon and winter season in 2017–18. Sample aliquots were taken (~3–4) from a stretch of ~100 m at each site and concentrated in a single container (100 ml). Effort was made to collect the sample once in each season. A plankton net of 53-micron and hand net of 100-micron mesh size was used for the collection. The sediment was gently disturbed, and water was filtered subsequently with the hand net for better representation of meiobenthic species. The samples were preserved in 4% formalin. Dissolved Oxygen was taken using a DO probe (Hanna) and salinity, pH, water temperature were taken at each sampling station using a multiparameter probe (Eutech). Identifications were done under light microscope (Olympus CH20i) and stereo microscope (Magnus MS 24). Identification was done using standard literature available for the respective groups (Supplementary list 1). Zooplankton data for the Aundh Bridge site was taken from Vanjare et al. (2010) and Padhye & Dahanukar (2015) since the site was inaccessible during the sampling period. Urbanization extent was assessed qualitatively by visual inspection.

 

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

 

Environmental data recorded during the study are shown in supplementary Table 1. The pH ranged from 7.12–8.6, dissolved oxygen from 0.25–11.8 mg/L, water temperature from 18.6–32°C and salinity from 105–386 ppm. No environmental data was collected for the Garware College site.

Seventy-three species of three different zooplankton groups were documented, of which rotifers being the most species rich with 47 species, followed by cladocerans—15 and ostracods—11, respectively (supplementary Table 2). Rotifers were reported from only three localities while cladocerans and ostracod species were observed at all the four sampling stations (Figure 2). Sampling stations having lesser urbanization had more species of rotifers (Ram Mula = 31 & Vitthalwadi = 34) with no species seen at the locality in the city centre (Garware College, Figure 1). Maximum species of cladocerans and ostracods were found at the Aundh Bridge (cladocerans = 11; ostracods = 7) though, representatives of these groups were also found at the Garware College site.

Among the 47 rotifer species, 41 were from the order Ploima, five from the order Flosculariaceae (subclass Monogononta) and one from the family Philodinidae within the subclass Bdelloidea. The Brachionidae family was the most species-rich with 13 species followed by Lecanidae with nine species while eight rotifer families were represented by a single species only. Rotifer genera Brachionus and Lecane (n = 9 each) were found in high numbers which is typical of these genera in tropical waters (Arora & Mehra 2002). Notable findings include rotifers with a restricted geographic distribution like Brachionus durgae (Ram Mula & Vitthalwadi), Epiphanes brachionus spinosa (all sites) and Lecane stenroosi (Vitthalwadi) were also seen in the study. Three predatory rotifers from the family Asplanchnidae, viz. Asplanchnopus multiceps, Asplanchna brightwellii and Asplanchna priodonta were also observed at three of the four sites (Image 2). Most of the recorded rotifer species are common and cosmopolitan in distribution.

Chydorids were the most species rich cladoceran group with five species followed by Daphniidae with three. Both the moinid species were observed in high densities at the site located on river Mutha in the most urbanized region of Pune city (Garware College). Some of the species such as Simocephalus mixtus, Macrothrix spinosa, and Ilyocryptus spinifer are known to occur seasonally at one of the sites on Mula River (Aundh Bridge). Most of these species are commonly known from the region with Leydigia (Neoleydigia) ciliata and I. spinifer being the most commonly occurring species in Pune (Padhye et al. 2023) (Image 2).

Only one species from the ostracod genus, Ilyocypris sp., was seen at all the four sampling points while the oriental endemics like Stenocypris derupta Vávra, Plesiocypridopsis cf. dispar (Hartmann, 1964) and Chrissia formosa (Klie, 1938) were seen at the Ram-Mula confluence only. Heterocypris incongruens (Ramdohr, 1808) reported from Garware college is a cosmopolitan species known to tolerate high levels of pollution (Karakaş-Sarı & Külköylüoğlu 2008). Plesiocypridopsis cf dispar and Stenocypris sp. were seen near a natural spring pouring into the Mutha River at the Vitthalwadi site (Image 1).

Seventy-three species of rotifers, cladocerans, and ostarcods from just four locations in Pune City is a good number as compared to riverine fauna documented from some other urban zones of India. Arora & Mehra (2003) documented 89 rotifers from river Yamuna in Delhi, Hulyal & Kaliwal (2007) found 10 rotifers and six cladocerans in Almatti Reservoir of Bijapur, while Kamboj & Kamboj (2020) observed 10 rotifers and eight cladocerans in the Ganga River, Uttarakhand, and Rao (2001) reported 17 rotifers and six cladocerans from the river Ganga between Rishikesh and Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh. Reliable faunistic studies providing species numbers of ostracods from such habitats are not available. The variation observed in the species numbers between these studies could be explained by many possible differences in the geomorphological and geochemical features of the rivers, the local environmental conditions and biotic conditions such as predation pressure. Still, the trend in species numbers  concerning the specific taxonomical groups was consistent with other studies, i.e., rotifers having the most number of species as compared to cladocerans and ostracods (Sharma & Naik 1996; Arora & Mehra 2003; Sharma 2011). Similarly, the species number distribution between the order/families of each group was also in agreement with the studies available in India and other regions (Ploima being the most species-rich order in rotifers, Chydoridae being the most species-rich cladoceran family)

Occurrence of common species such as, Moina micrura, Brachionus spp., Polyarthra sp., and Heterocypris incongruens at such sites imply the ability of these organisms to tolerate a wide range of environmental conditions (Nogrady et al. 1993; Külköylüoğlu et al. 2018). Cultural eutrophication which can happen due to rapid urbanization (Dudgeon et al. 2006; Schindler 2006; Lodi et al. 2011) is known to affect zooplankton richness and increase the dominance of such common species in many cases (Nogrady et al. 1993; Dodson et al. 2000; Yuan & Pollard 2018; Kambhoj & Kambhoj 2020). Certain zooplankton species are known to evolve rapidly to cope with such environmental change to persist in unfavourable conditions like Daphnia magna adapting to an increased water temperature (Brans et al. 2017). The presence of such generalist species can lead to biotic homogenization, i.e., reduction in β diversity across space (Wang et al. 2021), which is a worldwide phenomenon noticed in disturbed ecosystems (Blair 2001; McKinney 2002, 2006, 2008; Liu et al. 2020). Kulkarni et al. (2021) showed that the species richness of aquatic gastropods decreased along an urbanization gradient including the rivers studied here with only invasive species reported in the most urbanized locality. This locality was very close to the Garware College site for which we recorded the lowest species numbers (Supplementary Table 1; Figure2).

The presence or absence of certain species/groups like zooplankton can be applied to indicate environmental disturbances (Duggan et al. 2001; Hulyal & Kaliwal 2008; Du et al. 2023). Certain species from the genus Brachionus are indicators of eutrophic conditions of water (Mäemets 1983) and we found seven species in our collections especially B. angularis, B. rubens, B. calyciflorus). An epizoic association of the rotifer Brachionus rubens and cladoceran Moina macrocopa was observed at the Aundh Bridge site with over 40 individuals of B. rubens attached to a single individual of M. macrocopa. This association was seen during the peak summer months (April/May) when the DO level was very low (Vanjare et al. 2010) and not observed at any other studied site. Dark red-coloured cladoceran species (Moina micrura, M. macrocopa, and K. longirostris) were spotted at the Aundh bridge site during the summer months when the DO was the lowest (Vanjare et al. 2010). We also observed a faint red coloration in the Moina species collected at the other localities in the winter samples. This  colour change occurs due to haemoglobin production as a response to low dissolved oxygen in the water (Fox 1949).

Our study was based only on four sites on rivers Mula Mutha with no data available for upstream patches of both the rivers where the urbanization is relatively lower than the main city. Exhaustive sampling including more upstream localities would certainly increase the species number. Studying the environmental change indicator potential of these zooplankton groups along with long-term monitoring of their community dynamics will surely help us understand and devise ways of monitoring the impacts of urbanization. Conducting such studies is crucial in light of biodiversity loss happening as a consequence of increasing urbanization (Kharat et al. 2001, 2003).

 

 

For figures & images - - click here for full PDF

 

 

REFERENCES

 

Adamczuk, M., T. Mieczan, M. Tarkowska-Kukuryk & A. Demetraki-Paleolog (2015). Rotatoria–Cladocera–Copepoda relations in the long-term monitoring of water quality in lakes with trophic variation (E. Poland). Environmental Earth Sciences 73: 8189–8196.

Arora, J. & N.K. Mehra (2003). Seasonal dynamics of rotifers in relation to physical and chemical conditions of the river Yamuna (Delhi), India. Hydrobiologia 491: 101–109.

Arora, J. & N.K. Mehra (2003). Species diversity of planktonic and epiphytic rotifers in the backwaters of the Delhi segment of the Yamuna River, with remarks on new records from India. Zoological Studies 42(2): 239–247.

Bērziņš, B. & B. Pejler (1987). Rotifer occurrence in relation to pH. Hydrobiologia 147(1): 107–116.

Bērziņš, B. & B. Pejler (1989a). Rotifer occurrence in relation to oxygen content. Hydrobiologia 183(2): 165–172.

Bērzinš, B. & B. Pejler (1989b). Rotifer occurrence in relation to temperature. Hydrobiologia 175: 223–231.

Blair, R.B. (2001). Birds and butterflies along urban gradients in two ecoregions of the U.S. pp. 33–56. In: Lockwood, J.L. & M.L. McKinney (eds.). Biotic Homogenization. Norwell (MA): Kluwer

Braghin, L., B.D.C. Almeida, T.F. Canella, B. Garcia & C.C. Bonecker (2018). Effects of dams decrease zooplankton functional -diversity in river-associated lakes. Freshwater Biology 63: 721–730

Butsch, C., S. Kumar, P.D. Wagner, M. Kroll, L.N. Kantakumar, E. Bharucha, K. Schneider & F. Kraas (2017). Growing ‘smart’? Urbanization processes in the Pune urban agglomeration. Sustainability 9(12): 2335. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9122335

Cohen, B. (2006). Urbanization in developing countries: current trends, future projections, and key challenges for sustainability. Technology in Society 28(1–2): 63–80.

Dodson, S.I., S.E. Arnott & K.L. Cottingham (2000). The relationship in lake communities between primary productivity and species richness. Ecology 81(10): 2662–2679.

Du, C., F. Zhao, G. Shang, L. Wang, E. Jeppesen, L. Zhang, W. Zhang, & X. Fang (2023). Ammonia Influences the Zooplankton Assemblage and Beta Diversity Patterns in Complicated Urban River Ecosystems. Water 15(8): 1449.

Dudgeon, D., A.H. Arthington, M.O. Gessner, Z.I. Kawabata, D.J. Knowler, C. Lévêque, R.J. Naiman, A-H 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. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1464793105006950

Duggan, I.C., J.D. Green & R.J. Shiel (2001). Distribution of rotifers in North Island, New Zealand, and their potential use as bioindicators of lake trophic state. Hydrobiologia 446/447: 155–164.

Dumont, H.J. & S.V. Negrea (2002). Branchiopoda. Guides to the Identification of Microinvertebrates of the Continental Waters of the World. Backhuys, Netherlands.

Everard, M. & H.L. Moggridge (2012). Rediscovering the value of urban rivers. Urban Ecosystems 15: 293–314.

Fox, H. (1949). Hæmoglobin in Crustacea. Nature 164: 59.

George, S. & K. Martens (2002). On a new species of Potamocypris (Crustacea, Ostracoda) from Chalakkudy River (Kerala, India), with a checklist of the Potamocypris species of the world. Zootaxa 66: 115.

George, S. & K. Martens (2004). On the taxonomic position of the Indiacypridinae (Crustacea, Ostracoda), with the description of a new species of Indiacypris. Journal of Natural History 38: 537–548.

Gole, P. (1983). Birds of a polluted river. Journal of Ecological Society 32–33: 140–149

Henderson, V. (2002). Urbanization in developing countries. The World Bank Research Observer 17(1): 89–112.

Hulyal, S.B. & B.B. Kaliwal (2008). Water quality assessment of Almatti Reservoir of Bijapur (Karnataka State, India) with special reference to zooplankton. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 139: 299–306.

Jeppesen, E., P. Noges, T.A. Davidson, J. Haberman, T. Nõges, K. Blank, T.L. Lauridsen, M. Søndergaard, C. Sayer, R. Laugaste, L.S. Johansson, R. Bjerring & S.L. Amsinck (2011). Zooplankton as indicators in lakes: a scientific-based plea for including zooplankton in the ecological quality assessment of lakes according to the European Water Framework Directive (WFD). Hydrobiologia 676: 279–297

Kamboj, V. & N. Kamboj (2020). Spatial and temporal variation of zooplankton assemblage in the mining-impacted stretch of Ganga River, Uttarakhand, India. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 27: 27135–27146.

Kar, S., P. Das, U. Das, M Bimola, D. Kar & G. Aditya (2018). Correspondence of zooplankton assemblage and water quality in wetlands of Cachar, Assam, India: Implications for environmental management. Limnological Review 18(1): 9.

Karakaş-Sarı, P. & O. Külköylüoğlu (2008). Comparative ecology of Ostracoda (Crustacea) in two rheocrene springs (Bolu, Turkey). Ecological Research 23: 821–830.

Kharat, S.S., N. Dahanukar & R. Raut (2001). Decline of freshwater fish of Pune urban area. Journal of Ecological Society 13(14): 46–51.

Kharat, S.S., N. Dahanukar, R. Raut & M. Mahabaleshwarkar (2003). Long-term changes in freshwater fish species composition in North Western Ghats, Pune District. Current Science 84(6): 816–820.

Koparde, P. & N. Raote (2016). Areas of avian richness across an urban-rural setting: A case study of selected water-bodies from Pune, Maharashtra, India. Indian Birds 12(2&3): 50–55

Kulkarni, A.S. & K.A. Subramanian (2013). Habitat and seasonal distribution of Odonata (Insecta) of Mula and Mutha river basins, Maharashtra, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 5(7): 4084–4095. https://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.o3253.4084-95

Kulkarni, M.R., A. Bagade & S.M. Padhye (2021). Freshwater gastropod richness patterns along an urbanization gradient in tropical India. Journal of Urban Ecology 7(1): juab035. https://doi.org/10.1093/jue/juab035

Külköylüoğlu, O., M. Yavuzatmaca, D. Akdemir, E. Çelen & N. Dalkıran (2018). Ecological classification of the freshwater Ostracoda (Crustacea) based on physicochemical properties of waters and habitat preferences. Annales de Limnologie-International Journal of Limnology 54: 26.  https://doi.org/10.1051/limn/2018017

Liu, P., S. Xu, J. Lin, H. Li, Q. Lin & B.P. Han (2020). Urbanization increases biotic homogenization of zooplankton communities in tropical reservoirs. Ecological Indicators 110: 105899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105899

Lodi, S., L.C. Vieira, G. Velho, L.F.M. Bonecker, C.C.P. de Carvalho & L.M. Bini (2011). Zooplankton community metrics as indicators of eutrophication in urban lakes. Natureza & Conservação 9(1): 87–92.

McKinney, M.L. (2002). Urbanization, Biodiversity, and Conservation. The impacts of urbanization on native species are poorly studied, but educating a highly urbanized human population about these impacts can greatly improve species conservation in all ecosystems. Bioscience 52(10): 883–890.

McKinney, M.L. (2006). ‘Urbanization as a Major Cause of Biotic Homogenization. Biological Conservation 127: 247–60.

McKinney, M.L. (2008). Effects of urbanization on species richness: a review of plants and animals. Urban Ecosystems 11: 161–176.

McMichael, A.J. (2000). The urban environment and health in a world of increasing globalization: issues for developing countries. The Bulletin of the World Health Organization 78(9): 1117–26.

Nogrady, T., R.L. Wallace & T.W. Snell (1993). Rotifera, Vol. 1. Biology, ecology and systematics. In: Nogrady, T. & H.J. Dumont (eds.). Guides to the Identification of the Microinvertebrates of the Continental Waters of the World. SPB Academic Publishing BV, The Hague, 142 pp.

Ouyang, Y., J. Higman, J. Thompson, T. O’Toole & D. Campbell (2002). Characterization and spatial distribution of heavy metals in sediment from Cedar and Ortega rivers Basin. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology 54(1–2): 19–35.

Padhye, S.M. & N. Dahanukar (2015). Determinants of ‘water fleas’ (Crustacea: Branchiopoda: Cladocera) diversity across seasonal and environmental gradients of a polluted river. Current Science 109: 1777–1780.

Padhye, S.M. (2020). Seasonal variation in functional composition and diversity of cladoceran zooplankton of a lotic eutrophic habitat from India. Annales de Limnologie-International Journal of Limnology 56: 11.

Padhye, S.M., A.I. Vanjare & K. van Damme (2023). Cladoceran community composition and diversity patterns from different lentic freshwater bodies in peninsular India. Fundamental and Applied Limnology 196(2): 121–135. https://doi.org/10.1127/fal/2023/1491

Padmavati, G. & S.C. Goswami (1996). Zooplankton ecology in the Mandovi-Zuari estuarine system of Goa, west coast of India. Indian Journal of Geo-Marine Sciences 25(3): 268–273.

Rajaram T. & A. Das (2008). Water pollution by industrial effluents in India: discharge scenarios and case for participatory ecosystem specific local regulation. Futures 40: 56–69.

Rao, R.J. (2001). Biological resources of the Ganga River, India. Hydrobiologia 458: 159–168.

Ritchie, H. & H. Roser (2018). “Urbanization”. Published online at OurWorldInData.org. Retrieved from: ‘https://ourworldindata.org/urbanization’ Online Resource. Accessed on 1 March 2023

Schindler, D.W. (2006). Recent advances in the understanding and management of eutrophication. Limnology and  Oceanography 51(1part2): 356–363.

Schindler, D.W. (2012). The dilemma of controlling cultural eutrophication of lakes. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences  279: 4322–4333.

Sharma, B.K. & L.P. Naik (1996). Results on planktonic Rotifers in the Narmada River (Madhya Pradesh), pp. 189–198 In: Schiemer, F. & K.T. Boland (eds.). Perspectives in Tropical Limnology. SPB Academic Publishing bv. Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Sharma, B.K. (2011). Zooplankton communities of Deepor Beel (a Ramsar site), Assam (N. E. India): ecology, richness, and abundance. Tropical Ecology 52(3): 293–302.

Sharma, B.K. & S. Sharma (2021). Biodiversity of Indian Rotifers (Rotifera) with remarks on biogeography and richness in diverse ecosystems. Opuscula Zoologica (Budapest) 52(1): 69–97. https://doi.org/10.18348/opzool.2021.1.69

Tran Khac, V., Y. Hong, D. Plec, B.J. Lemaire, P. Dubois, M. Saad & B. Vinçon-Leite (2018). An Automatic Monitoring System for High-Frequency Measuring and Real-Time Management of Cyanobacterial Blooms in Urban Water Bodies. Processes 6(2): 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr6020011

UNDESA (2018). World Urbanization Prospects: The 2018 Revision, Online Edition. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. https://population.un.org/wup/Download/Files/WUP2018-F22 Cities_Over_300K_Annual.xls. Accessed on 28 April 2023.

Vanjare, A.I., S.M. Padhye & K. Pai (2010). Zooplankton from a polluted river, Mula (India), with record of Brachionus rubens (Ehrenberg, 1838) epizoic on Moina macrocopa (Straus, 1820). Opuscula Zoologica 41: 89–92.

Wagh, G. K. & H.V. Ghate (2003). Freshwater fish fauna of the rivers Mula and Mutha, Pune, Maharashtra. Zoos’ Print Journal 18(1): 977–981. https://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.ZPJ.18.1.977-89

Yuan, L.L. & A.I. Pollard (2018). Changes in the relationship between zooplankton and phytoplankton biomasses across a eutrophication gradient. Limnology and Oceanography 63(6): 2493–2507. https://doi.org/10.1002/lno.10955

 

 

 

 

Supplementary Table 1. Environmental parameters at the site.

 

Site/

Parameter

Temperature

(°C)

pH

Salinity

(ppm)

DO

(mg/L)

Remarks

 

 

 

 

 

 

Aundh Bridge

23.8–32.0

7.3–8.2

227–386

1.2–7.3

See Vanjare et al. 2010

Aundh Bridge

24–31.2

7.12–8.05

105–386

0.81–4.15

See Padhye & Dahanukar 2015

Ram-Mula

18.6–24.0

7.2–7.8

227–382

0.44–8.80

Current study

Vitthalwadi

22.0–30.1

7.2–8.6

129–356

0.25–11.8

Current study

 

 

Supplementary Table 2. List of species observed at the sites.

Phylum Rotifera

Asplanchnidae

 

 

Asplanchna brightwellii Gosse, 1850

Asplanchna priodonta Gosse, 1850

Asplanchnopus multiceps Schrank, 1793

Brachionidae

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Brachionus angularis (Gosse, 1851)

Brachionus bidentata (Anderson, 1889)

Brachionus calyciflorus (Pallas, 1766)

Brachionus caudatus (Barrois & Daday, 1894)

Brachionus diversicornis Daday, 1883

Brachionus durgae (Dhanapathi, 1974)

Brachionus falcatus (Zacharias, 1898)

Brachionus quadridentatus (Hermann, 1783)

Brachionus rubens (Ehrenberg, 1838)

Keratella cochlearis (Gosse, 1851)

Keratella tropica (Apstein, 1907)

Plationus patulus (Müller, 1786)

Platyias quadricornis (Ehrenberg, 1832)

Epiphanidae

 

 

Epiphanes brachionus spinosa (Rousselet, 1901)

Beauchampiella eudactylota (Gosse, 1886)

Euchlanis dilatata (Ehrenberg, 1832)

Euchlanidae

Tripleuchlanis plicata (Levander, 1894)

Lecanidae

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lecane bulla (Gosse, 1851)

Lecane closterocerca (Schmarda, 1859)

Lecane hamata (Stokes, 1896)

Lecane leontina (Turner, 1892)

Lecane luna (Müller, 1776)

Lecane lunaris (Ehrenberg, 1832)

Lecane papuana (Murray, 1913)

Lecane curvicornis (Murray, 1913)

Lecane stenroosi (Meissner, 1908)

Lepadellidae

 

 

 

Colurella obtusa (Gosse, 1886)

Lepadella (Heterolepadella) ehrenbergii (Perty, 1850)

Lepadella (Lepadella) ovalis (Müller, 1786)

Squatinella lamellaris (Müller, 1786)

Mytilinidae

 

Mytilina bisulcata (Lucks, 1912)

Mytilina ventralis (Ehrenberg, 1830)

Notommatidae

 

 

Cephalodella sp.

Monommata sp.

Taphrocampa annulosa (Gosse, 1851)

Scaridiidae

Scaridium longicaudum (Müller, 1786)

Synchaetidae

Polyarthra vulgaris (Carlin, 1943)

Trichocercidae

Trichocerca cylindrica (Imhof, 1891)

Hexarthridae

Hexarthra mira (Hudson, 1871)

Filiniidae

Filinia longiseta (Ehrenberg, 1834)

Testudinellidae

Testudinella patina (Hermann, 1783)

Flosculariidae

 

Sinantherina semibullata (Thorpe, 1893)

Lacinularia elliptica Shephard, 1897

Philodinidae

Rotaria neptunia (Ehrenberg, 1830)

 

 

CLADOCERA

 Sididae

 

Latonopsis australis Sars, 1888 s.lat.

Diaphanosoma sarsi (Richard, 1895)

 Daphniidae

 

Daphnia (Ctenodaphnia) lumholtzi (Sars, 1885)

Ceriodaphnia cornuta (Sars, 1885)

Simocephalus (Simocephalus) mixtus (Sars, 1903)

 Moinidae

 

Moina macrocopa (Straus, 1820)

Moina micrura (Kurz, 1874)

 Macrothricidae

 

Macrothrix spinosa (King, 1853)

Macrothrix triserialis (Brady, 1886)

 Ilyocryptidae

Ilyocryptus spinifer (Herrick, 1882)

 Chydoridae

 

 

 

 

Flavalona cheni (Sinev, 2001)

Ovalona cambouei (Guerney et Richard, 1893)

Kurzia longirostris (Daday, 1898)

Leydigia (Neoleydigia) ciliata (Gauthier, 1939)

Chydorus eurynotus (Sars, 1901)

OSTRACODA

Cyprididae

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chrissia formosa (Klie, 1938)

Stenocypris hislopi (Ferguson, 1969)

Stenocypris derupta (Vávra, 1906)

Cypris granulata (Daday, 1898)

Plesiocypridopsis cf dispar (Hartmann, 1964)

Heterocypris incongruens (Ramdohr, 1808)

Hemicypris pyxidata (Moniez, 1892)

Hemicypris ovata Sars, 1903

Cyprinotus cingalensis Brady, 1886

Candonidae

Physocypria sp.

Ilyocyprididae

Ilyocypris sp.

 

 

Supplementary List 1. List of references used for identification, classification and nomenclature used for identifying Rotifera, Claodocera, and Ostracoda.

 

Benzie, J.A.H. (2005). The genus Daphnia (including Daphniopsis) (Anomopoda: Daphniidae). In: Dumont, H.J. (ed.). Guides to the identification of the microinvertebrates of the continental waters of the world. SPB Academic Publishing, 383 pp.

Berner, D.B. (1985). Morphological differentiation among species in the Ceriodaphnia cornuta complex (Crustacea, Cladocera). Verhandlungen der Internationalen Vereinigung fuer Theoretische und Angewandte Limnologie 22: 3099–3103.

Dumont, H.J. & J. Pensaert (1983). A revision of the Scapholeberinae (Crustacea: Cladocera). Hydrobiologia 100: 3–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00027420

Dumont, H.J. & M. Silva–Briano (2000). Karualona n. gen. (Anomopoda: Chydoridae), with a description of two new species, and a key to all known species. Hydrobiologia 435: 61–82.

Dumont, H.J., M. Silva–Briano & K.K.S. Babu (2002). A re-evaluation of the Macrothrix rosea–triserialis group, with the description of two new species (Crustacea Anomopoda: Macrothricidae). Hydrobiologia 467: 1–44.

Goulden, C.E. (1968). The systematics and evolution of the Moinidae. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society Held at Philadelphia 58: 1–101. https://doi.org/10.2307/1006102

Hudec, I. (1991). A comparison of populations from the Daphnia similis group (Cladocera: Daphniidae). Hydrobiologia 225: 9–22.

Hudec, I. (2000). Subgeneric differentiation within Kurzia (Crustacea: Anomopoda: Chydoridae) and a new species from Central America. Hydrobiologia 421: 165–178.

Karanovic, I. (2011). On the recent Cyclocypridinae (Podocopida, Candonidae) with description of two new genera and one new species. Zootaxa 61: 1–61.

Korovchinsky, N.M. (1992). Sididae & Holopediidae (Crustacea: Daphniiformes). Guides to the identification of the microinvertebrates of the continental waters of the world 3. SPB Academic Publishing, The Hague, 82 pp.

Koste, W. (1978). Rotatoria. Die Rädertiere Mittel-europas, begründet von Max Voigt. Überordnung Monogononta. Gebrüder Borntraeger, Berlin, Stuttgart. I. 673 pp., II. Tafelband, 234 pp.

Koste, W. & R.J. Shiel (1987). Rotifera from Australian inland waters. II. Epiphanidae and Brachionidae (Rotifera, Monogononta). Invertebrate taxonomy 7: 949–1021.

Koste, W. & R.J. Shiel (1990). Rotifera from Australian inland waters. V. Lecanidae (Rotifera, Monogononta). Transactions of the Royal Society of South Australia 114: 1–36.

Kotov, A.A. (2000). Re-description and assignment of the chydorid Indialona ganapati Petkovski, 1966 (Branchiopoda: Anomopoda: Aloninae) to Indialonini, new tribus. Hydrobiologia 439: 161–178.

Kotov, A.A. (2009). A revision of Leydigia Kurz, 1875 (Anomopoda, Cladocera, Branchiopoda), and subgeneric differentiation within the genus. Zootaxa 2082: 1–68.

Kotov, A.A. & P. Štifter (2006). Ilyocryptidae of the world. Guides to the identification of the microinvertebrates of the continental waters of the world. Dumont, H.J., SPB Academic Publishing: 1–172.

Kotov, A.A., S. Ishida & D.J. Taylor (2009). Revision of the genus Bosmina Baird, 1845 (Cladocera: Bosminidae), based on evidence from male morphological characters and molecular phylogenies. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 156: 1–51.

Kuddus, M. A., E. Tynan & E. McBryde (2020). Urbanization: a problem for the rich and the poor? Public Health Reviews 41: 1–4.

Michael, R.G. & B.K. Sharma (1988). Fauna of India and adjacent countries. Indian Cladocera (Crustacea: Branchiopoda: Cladocera). Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta, 262 pp.

Onda, K., P. Sinha, A.E. Gaughan, F.R. Stevens & N. Kaza (2019). Missing millions: undercounting urbanization in India. Population and Environment 41: 126–150.

Rajapaksa, R. & C.H. Fernando (1986). A review of the systematics and distribution of Chydorus ventricosus Daday, 1898, with the first description of the male and redescription of the species. Canadian Journal of Zoology 64: 818–832. https://doi.org/10.1139/z86-123

Rajapaksa, R. & C.H. Fernando (1987). Redescription and assignment of Alona globulosa Daday, 1898 to a new genus Notoalona and a description of Notoalona freyi sp. nov. Hydrobiologia 144: 131–153. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00014527

Segers, H. (1995) Rotifera 2: Lecanidae. In: Dumont, H.J. & Nogrady, T. (Eds.) Guides to identification of the Microinvertebrates of the Continental waters of the world, 6. SPB Academic Publishing bv. Amsterdam, the Netherlands, 226 pp.

Segers, H. (2002). The nomenclature of the Rotifera: annotated checklist of valid familyand genus-group names. Journal of Natural History 36(6): 631–640.

Segers, H. (2007). Annotated checklist of the rotifers (Phylum Rotifera), with notes on nomenclature, taxonomy and distribution. Zootaxa 1564 (1): 1–104.

Sinev, A.Y. (1999). Alona costata Sars, 1862 versus related palaeotropical species: the first example of close relations between species with a different number of main head pores among Chydoridae (Crustacea: Anomopoda). Arhropoda Selecta 8(3): 131–148.

Sinev, A.Y. (2001). Separation of Alona cambouei Guerne & Richard, 1893 from Alona pulchella King, 1853 (Branchiopoda: Anomopoda: Chydoridae). Arthropoda Selecta 10(1): 5–18.

Sinev, A.Y., K. Van Damme & A.A. Kotov (2005). Redescription of tropical–temperate cladocerans Alona diaphana King, 1853 and Alona davidi Richard, 1895 and their translocation to Leberis Smirnov, 1989 (Branchiopoda: Anomopoda: Chydoridae). Arthropoda Selecta 14(3): 183–205.

Sinev, A.Y. (2011). Re-description of the rheophilous Cladocera Camptocercus vietnamensis Than, 1980 (Cladocera: Anomopoda: Chydoridae). Zootaxa 2934: 53–60.

Sinev, A.Y., P.G. Garibian & Y. Gu (2016). A new species of Pseudochydorus Fryer, 1968 (Cladocera: Anomopoda: Chydoridae) from South-East Asia. Zootaxa 4079: 129–139.

Sharma, B.K. & S. Sharma (2014). The diversity of Indian Brachionidae (Rotifera: Eurotatoria: Monogononta) and their distribution. Opuscula Zoologica (Budapest) 45(2): 165–180.

Sharma, B.K. & S. Sharma (2021). Biodiversity of Indian Rotifers (Rotifera) with remarks on biogeography and richness in diverse ecosystems. Opuscula Zoologica (Budapest) 52(1): 69–97.

Smirnov, N.N. (1971). Chydoridae fauny mira. Fauna USSR. Rakoobraznie, 1. Leningrad [English translation: Chydoridae of the World]. Israel Program for Scientific Translations, Jerusalem.

Smirnov, N.N. (1992). The Macrothricidae of the world. In: Dumont, H.J. (ed.). Guides to the Identification of the Microinvertebrates of the Continental Waters of the World. SPB Academic Publications, 143 pp.

Smirnov, N.N. (1996). Cladocera: The Chydorinae and Sayciinae (Chydoridae) of the World. In: Dumont, H.J. (ed.). Guides to the Identification of the Microinvertebrates of the Continental Waters of the World. SPB Academic Publications, 197 pp.

van Damme, K. & H.J. Dumont (2008). The ‘true’ genus Alona Baird, 1843 (Crustacea: Cladocera: Anomopoda): characters of the A. quadrangularis group and description of a new species from Democratic Republic Congo. Zootaxa 1945: 1–25.

van Damme, K., A.Y Sinev & H.J. Dumont (2011). Separation of Anthalona gen.n. from Alona Baird, 1843 (Branchiopoda: Cladocera: Anomopoda): morphology and evolution of scraping tenothermic alonines. Zootaxa 2875: 1–64.

Victor, R. & C.H. Fernando (1979). Freshwater ostracods (Ostracoda: Crustacea) of India. Records of Zoological Survey of India 74: 147–242.

Victor, R. & C.H. Fernando (1981a). Freshwater Ostracoda of the genera Chrissia Hartmann, 1957 and Stenocypris Sars, 1839 from Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines. Mitteilungen aus dem Hamburgischen Zoologischen Museum und Institut 78: 151–168.

Victor, R. & C.H. Fernando (1981b). Freshwater ostracods (Crustacea: Ostracoda) of the subfamily Cyprinotinae Bronstein, 1947 from Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines. Hydrobiologia 83: 11–27.