Free Access
Issue
Ann. Limnol. - Int. J. Lim.
Volume 45, Number 2, 2009
Page(s) 69 - 78
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/limn/2009013
Published online 20 June 2009
  • Amoros C., Roux A.L., Reygrobellet J.L., Bravard J.P. and Pautou G., 1987. A method for applied ecological studies of fluvial hydrosystems. Regul. Riv. Res. Manage., 1, 17–36. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Armitage P.D. and Pardo I., 1995. Impact assessment of regulation at the reach level using macroinvertebrate information from mesohabitats. Regul. Riv. Res. Manage., 10, 147–158. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Baptist M.J., 2001. Review on biogeomorphology in rivers: processes and scales, CFR report 3, Delft University of Technology, Delft. [Google Scholar]
  • Baptista D.F., Buss D.F., Dorvillé L.F.M. and Nessimian J.L., 2001. Diversity and habitat preference of aquatic insects along the longitudinal gradient of the Macaé River basin, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Rev. Brasil. Biol., 61, 249–258. [Google Scholar]
  • Boccolini M.F., Oberto A.M. and Corigliano M.C., 2005. Calidad ambiental en un río urbano de llanura. Biol. Acuática, 22, 59–69. [Google Scholar]
  • Brooks A.J., Haeusler T., Reinfelds I. and Williams S., 2005. Hydraulic microhabitats and the distribution of macroinvertebrate assemblages in riffles. Freshwat. Biol., 50, 331–344. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Brunke M., Hoffmann A. and Pusch M., 2001. Use of mesohabitat-specific relationships between flow velocity and river discharge to assess invertebrate minimum flow requirements. Aquatic Conserv. Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst., 17, 667–676. [Google Scholar]
  • Buffagni A., Crosa G.A., Harper D.M. and Kemp J.L., 2000. Using macroinvertebrate species assemblages to identify river channel habitat units: an application of the functional habitats concept to a large, unpolluted Italian river (River Ticino, northern Italy). Hydrobiologia, 435, 213–225. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Corigliano M.C., Gualdoni C.M. and Oberto A.M., 1987. Deriva de macroinvertebrados en un tramo anastomosado de un río de llanura. Rev. UNRC, 7, 89–98. [Google Scholar]
  • Crosa G. and Buffagni A., 1996. L'habitat idraulico quale elemento per la gestione degli ambienti fluviali. S. It. E. Atti., 17, 581–583. [Google Scholar]
  • Davies N.M., Norris R.H. and Thoms M., 2000. Prediction and assessment of local stream habitat features using large-scale catchment characteristics. Freshwat. Biol., 45, 343–369. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Degiovanni S.B., Villegas S.M. and Doffo N., 1995. Propuesta de ordenamiento territorial en el tramo urbano del río Cuarto sobre la base del análisis del riesgo de erosión de márgenes. In: Blarasin M., Degiovanni S., Cabrera A. and Villegas M. (eds.), Problemática Geoambiental y Desarrollo Sustentable, Universidad Nacional de Río Cuarto, Río Cuarto, 447–467. [Google Scholar]
  • Fernández H.R. and Domínguez E. (eds.), 2001. Guía para la determinación de los artrópodos bentónicos sudamericanos, Universidad Nacional de Tucumán, Facultad de Ciencias Naturales e Instituto M. Lillo, Tucumán, 282 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Frissell C.A., Liss W.J., Warren C.E. and Hurley M.S., 1986. A hierarchical framework for stream habitat classification: viewing streams in a watershed context. Environ. Manage., 10, 199–214. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Gauch H.G., 1982. Multivariate analysis in community ecology, Cambridge, England, Cambridge University Press, 298 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Gjerlov C., Hildrew A.G. and Jones J.I., 2003. Mobility of stream invertebrates in relation to disturbance and refugia: a test of habitat templet theory. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc., 22, 207–223. [Google Scholar]
  • Gordon N.D., McMahon T.A. and Finlayson B.L., 1992. Stream hydrology. An introduction for ecologist, Wiley and Sons, New York, 526 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Halwas K.L. and Church M., 2005. Benthic assemblage variation among channel units in high-gradient streams on Vancouver Island, British Columbia. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc., 24, 478–494. [Google Scholar]
  • Harper D. and Everard M., 1998. Why should the habitat-level approach underpin holistic river survey and management? Aquatic Conserv. Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst., 8, 395–413. [Google Scholar]
  • Harper D.M., Smith C.D. and Barham P.J., 1992. Habitat as the building blocks for river conservation assessment. In: Boon P.J., Calow P. and Petts G.E. (eds.), River Conservation and Management, Wiley and Sons, Chichester, 311–319. [Google Scholar]
  • Harper D.M., Smith C., Barham P. and Howell R., 1995. The ecological basis for the management of the natural river environment. In: Harper D.M. and Ferguson A.J. (eds.), The ecological basis for river management, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, 219–238. [Google Scholar]
  • Hawkins C.P., 1984. Substrate associations and longitudinal distributions in species of Ephemerellidae (Ephemeroptera: Insecta) from western Oregon. Freshwat. Invert. Biol., 3, 181–188. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hawkins C.P., Kershner J.L, Bisson P.A., Bryant M.D., Decker L.M., Gregory S.V., McCulloch D.A., Overton C.K., Reeves G.H., Steedman R.J. and Young M.K., 1993. A hierarchical approach to classifying stream habitat features. Fisheries, 18, 3–12. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hill M.O., 1979. TWINSPAN. A Fortran program for arranging multivariate data in an ordered two-way table by classification of the individuals and attributes, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York. [Google Scholar]
  • Hiromi T., Nakano S. and Tokeshi M., 2003. Influences of habitat complexity on the diversity and abundance of epiphytic invertebrates on plants. Freshwat. Biol., 48, 718–728. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hynes H.B.N., 1970. The ecology of running waters, University of Toronto Press, Toronto, 555 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Kemp J.L., Harper D.M. and Crosa G.A., 1999. Use of ‘functional habitats’ to link ecology with morphology and hydrology in river rehabilitation. Aquat. Conserv. Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst., 9, 159–178. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Kemp J.L., Harper D.M. and Crosa G.A., 2000. The habitat-scale ecohydraulics of rivers. Ecol. Eng., 16, 17–29. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Lopretto E.C. and Tell G., 1995. Ecosistemas de aguas continentales, Metodologías para su estudio, Ediciones Sur, La Plata, 1401 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Malmquist H.L., Antonsson T., Gudbergsson G., Skülason S. and Snorrason S.S., 2000. Biodiversity of macroinvertebrates on rocky substrate in the surf zone of iceland lakes. Verh. Internat. Verein. Limnol., 27, 121–127. [Google Scholar]
  • Pardo I. and Armitage P.D., 1997. Species assemblages as descriptors of mesohabitats. Hydrobiologia, 344, 111–128. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Pedersen M.L., 2003. Physical structure in lowland streams and effects of disturbance, Ph.D. Thesis, National Environmental Research Institute, Silkeborg, Denmark, 108 p., http://www.dmu.dk/1_Viden/2_Publikationer/3_Ovrige/default.asp. [Google Scholar]
  • Principe R.E., Raffaini G.B., Gualdoni C.M., Oberto A.M. and Corigliano M.C., 2007. Do hydraulic units define macroinvertebrate assemblages in mountain streams of central Argentina? Limnologica, 37, 323–336. [Google Scholar]
  • Ramírez A., Paaby P., Pringle C.M. and Agüero G., 1998. Effect of habitat type on benthic macroinvertebrates in two lowland tropical streams, Costa Rica. Rev. Biol. Trop., 46, 201–213. [Google Scholar]
  • Reich P. and Downes B.J., 2003. The distribution of aquatic invertebrate egg masses. Freshwat. Biol., 48, 1497–1513. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Robinson C.T., Tockner K. and Ward J.V., 2002. The fauna of dynamic riverine landscapes. Freshwat. Biol., 47, 661–677. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Sanches Melo A. and Froehlich C.G., 2001. Macroinvertebrates in neotropical streams: richness patterns along a catchment and assemblage structure between 2 seasons. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc., 20, 1–16. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Statzner B., Gore J.A. and Resh V.H., 1988. Hydraulic stream ecology: observed patterns and potential applications. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc., 7, 307–360. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Ter Braak C.J.F. and Šmilauer P., 1998. CANOCO Reference Manual and User's Guide to Canoco for Windows: Software for Canonical Community Ordination (version 4), Microcomputer Power, Ithaca, New York, 352 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Thomaz S.M, Bini L.M. and Bozelli R.L., 2007. Floods increase similarity among aquatic habitats in river-floodplain systems. Hydrobiologia, 579, 1–13. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Tickner D., Armitage P.D., Bickerton M.A. and Hall K.A., 2000. Assessing stream quality using information on mesohabitat distribution and character. Aquat. Conserv. Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst., 10, 170–196. [Google Scholar]
  • Tockner K., Paetzold A., Karaus U., Claret C. and Zettel J., 2006. Ecology of braided rivers. In: Sambroock Smith G.H., Best J.L., Bristow C.S. and Petts G. (eds.), Braided rivers, IAS Special Publication, Blackwell, Oxford. [Google Scholar]
  • Townsend C.R. and Hildrew A.G., 1994. Species traits in relation to a habitat templet for river systems. Freshwat. Biol., 31, 265–275. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Townsend C.R., Hildrew A.G. and Schofield K., 1987. Persistence of stream communities in relation to environmental variability. J. Anim. Ecol., 56, 597–613. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Townsend C.R., Arbuckle C.J., Crowl T.A. and Scarsbrook M.R., 1997. The relationship between land use and physicochemistry, food resources and macroinvertebrate communities in tributaries of the Taieri River, New Zealand: a hierarchically scaled approach. Freshwat. Biol., 37, 177–191. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Vadas R.L. and Orth D.J., 1998. Use of physical variables to discriminate visually determined mesohabitat types in North American streams. Rivers, 6, 143–159. [Google Scholar]
  • Velásquez S.M. and Miserendino M.L., 2003. Habitat type and macroinvertebrate assemblages in low order Patagonian streams. Arch. Hydrobiol., 158, 461–483. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Ward J.V., 1989. The four-dimensional nature of lotic ecosystems. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc., 8, 2–8. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Ward J.V., 1992. Aquatic Insect Ecology, Wiley and Sons, New York, 438 p. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.