Free Access
Issue
Ann. Limnol. - Int. J. Lim.
Volume 48, Number 4, 2012
Page(s) 391 - 400
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/limn/2012031
Published online 17 December 2012
  • Allan J.D., 2004. Landscape and rivers capes: the influence of land use on stream ecosystems. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst., 35, 257–284. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Armitage P.D., Cranston P.S. and Pinder L.C.V., 1995. The Chironomidae: Biology and ecology of non-biting midges, Chapman and Hall, London. [Google Scholar]
  • Bacey J. and Spurlock F., 2007. Biological assessment of urban and agricultural streams in the California Central Valley. Environ. Monitor. Assess., 130, 483–493. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Barrella W., Petrere Jr M., Smith W.S. and Montag L.F.A., 2000. As relações entre matas ciliares, os rios e os peixes. Cap. 12. In: Rodrigues R.R. and Leitão-Filho H.F. (eds.), Matas Ciliares Conservação e Recuperação. Edusp, São Paulo. [Google Scholar]
  • Benstead J.P. and Pringle C.M., 2004. Deforestation alters the resource base and biomass of endemic stream insects in eastern Madagascar. Freshwater Biol., 4, 490–501. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Benstead J.P., Douglas M.M. and Pringle C., 2003. Relationships of stream invertebrate communities to deforestation in eastern Madagascar. Ecol. Appl., 3, 147–149. [Google Scholar]
  • Bernardi S. and Budke J.C., 2010. Estrutura da sinúsia epifítica e efeito de borda em uma área de transição entre floresta estacional semidecídua e floresta Ombrófila Mista. Floresta, 40, 81–82. [Google Scholar]
  • Budke J.C., Alberti M.S., Zanardi C., Baratto C. and Zanin E.M., 2010. Bamboo dieback and tree regeneration responses in a subtropicalforest of South America. Forest Ecol. Manage., 260, 1345–1349. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Burns D.A., 2005. Macroinvertebrate response to land cover, habitat, and water chemistry in a mining-impacted river ecosystem: a GIS watershed analysis. Aquat. Sci., 67, 403–423. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Campbell B.D., Haro R.J. and Richardson W.B., 2009. Effects of agricultural land use on chironomid communities: comparisons among natural wetlands and farm ponds. Wetlands, 29, 1070–1080. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Corbi J.J. and Trivinho-Strixino S., 2008. Effects of land use on lotic Chironomid communities of southeast Brazil: emphasis on the impact of sugar cane cultivation. Bol. Mus. Mun. Funchal, Sup., 13, 93–100. [Google Scholar]
  • Decian V., Zanin E.M., Henke C., Quadros F.R. and Ferrari C.A., 2009. Uso da terra na região Alto Uruguai do Rio Grande do Sul e obtenção de banco de dados relacional de fragmentos de vegetação arbórea. Perspect., 33, 165–176. [Google Scholar]
  • Epler J., 2001. Identification Manual for the Larval Chironomidae (Diptera) of North and South Carolina, Departament of Enviromental a Natural Resources, Orlando. [Google Scholar]
  • Forman R.T.T. and Godron M., 1986. Landscape Ecology, John Wiley, New York. [Google Scholar]
  • Hawbaker T.J., Radeloff V.C., Clayton M.K., Hammer R.B. and Gonzalez-Abraham C.E., 2006. Road development, housing-growth, and landscape fragmentation in Northing Wisconsin. Ecol. Appl., 16, 1222–1237. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Henriques-Oliveira A.L., Sanseverino A.M. and Nessimian J.L., 1999. Larvas de Chironomidae (Insecta: Diptera) de substrato rochoso em dois rios em diferentes estados de preservação na Mata Atlântica, RJ. Acta Limnol. Brasil., 11, 17–28. [Google Scholar]
  • Henriques-Oliveira A.L., Dorvillé L.F.M. and Nessimian J.L., 2003. Distribution of Chironomidae larvae fauna (Insecta: Diptera) on different substrates in a stream at Floresta da Tijuca, RJ, Brazil. Acta Limnol. Brasil., 15, 69–84. [Google Scholar]
  • Hepp L.U. and Restello R.M., 2010. Macroinvertebrados bentônicos como ferramenta para avaliação de impactos resultantes dos usos da terra (Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil). In: Santos J.E., Zanin E.M. and Mosquini L.E. (eds.). Faces da Policemia da Paisagem: Ecologia, Planejamento, Percepção, Rima, São Carlos, SP. [Google Scholar]
  • Hepp L.U. and Santos S., 2009. Benthic communities of streams related to different land uses in a hydrographic basin in southern Brazil. Environ. Monitor. Assess., 157, 305–318. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Hepp L.U., Biasi C., Milesi S.V., Veiga F.O. and Restello R.M. 2008. Chironomidae (Diptera) larvae associated to Eucalyptus globulus and Eugenia uniflora leaf litter in a subtropical stream (Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil). Acta Limnol. Brasil., 20, 345–350. [Google Scholar]
  • Hepp L.U., Milesi S.V., Biasi C. and Restello R.M., 2010. Effects of agricultural and urban impacts on macroinvertebrates assemblages in streams (Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil). Zoologia, 27, 106–113. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hepp L.U., Landeiro V.L. and Melo A.S., 2012. Experimental assessment of the effects of environmental factors and longitudinal position on alpha and beta diversities of aquatic insects in a Neotropical stream. Int. Rev. Hydrobiol., 97, 157–167. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Kleine P. and Trivinho-Strixino S., 2005. Chironomidae and other aquatic macroinvertebrates of a first order stream: community response after habitat fragmentation. Acta Limnol. Brasil., 17, 81–90. [Google Scholar]
  • Kyriakeas S.A. and Watzin M.C., 2006. Effects of adjacent agricultural activities and watershed characteristics on stream macroinvertebrate communities. J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc., 42, 425–441. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Lampert M. and Allan J.D., 1999. Assessing biotic integrity of streams: effects of scale in measuring the influence of land use cover and habitat structure on fish and macroinvertebrates. Environ. Manage., 23, 257–270. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Legendre P. and Legendre L., 2003. Numerical Ecology, Elsevier, Amsterdam. [Google Scholar]
  • Lencioni V., Marziali L. and Rossaro B., 2012. Chironomids as bioindicators of environmental quality in mountain springs. Freshwater Sci., 31, 525–541. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Maloney K.O., Feminella J.W., Mitchell R.M., Miller S.A., Mulholland P.J. and Houser J.N., 2008. Land use and small streams: identifying relationships between historical land use and contemporary stream conditions. J. North Am. Benthol. Soc., 27, 280–294. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Matson P.A., Parton W.J., Power A.G. and Swift M.J., 1997. Agricultural intensification and ecosystem properties. Science, 277, 504–509. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Melo A.S., Schneck F., Hepp L.U., Simões N.R., Siqueira T. and Bini L.M., 2011. Focusing on variation: methods and applications of the concept of beta diversity in aquatic ecosystems. Acta Limnol. Brasil., 23, 318–331. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Merritt R.W. and Cummins K.W., 1996. An Introduction to the Aquatic Insects of North America, Dubuque, Kendal/Hunt, USA. [Google Scholar]
  • Metzger J.P., 2010. O Código Florestal tem base científica? Nat. Conserv., 1, 92–99. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Meyer J.L., Paul M.J. and Taulbee W.K., 2005. Stream ecosystem function in urbanizing landscape. J. North Am. Benthol. Soc., 24, 602–612. [Google Scholar]
  • Moulton T.P. and Souza M.L., 2006. Conservação com base em bacias hidrográficas. In: Rocha C.F.D. (ed.), Biologia da Conservação: Essências. Rima Editora, São Carlos, 157–182. [Google Scholar]
  • Niyogi D.K., Koren M., Arbuckle C.J. and Townsend C.R., 2007. Stream communities along a catchment land-use Gradient: subsidy-stress responses to pastoral development. Environ. Manage., 39, 213–225. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Oksanen J., Blanchet F.G., Kindt R., Legendre P., O'Hara R.B., Simpson G.L., Solymos P., Stevens M.H.H. and Wagner H., 2010. Multivariate Analysis of Ecological Communities in R: package “vegan”, 2010. http://vegan.rforge. r-project.org/ [Google Scholar]
  • Pinder L.C.V., 1986. Biology of Freshwater Chironomidae. Annu. Rev. Entomol., 31, 1–23. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Pinder L.C.V., 1995. The habitats of Chironomid larvae. In: Armitage P.D., Cranston P.S. and Pinder L.C.V. (eds.), The Chironomidae: Biology and Ecology of Non-biting Midges, Chapman and Hall, London, 107–135. [Google Scholar]
  • R Development Core Team, 2010. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, http://www.R-project.org [Google Scholar]
  • Roque F.O., Siqueira T. and Escarpinati S.C., 2009. Do fallen fruit-dwelling Chironomids in streams respond to riparian degradation? Pan-Am. J. Aquat. Sci., 4, 357–362. [Google Scholar]
  • Roque F.O., Siqueira T., Bini L.M., Ribeiro M.C., Tambosi L.R., Ciocheti G. and Trivinho-Strixino S., 2010. Untangling associations between Chironomid taxa in neotropical streams using local and landscape filters. Freshwater Biol., 55, 847–865. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Rosin G.C. and Takeda A.M., 2007. Larvas de Chironomidae (Diptera) da planície de inundação do alto rio Paraná: distribuição e composição em diferentes ambientes e períodos hidrológicos. Acta Sci. Biol. Sci., 29, 57–63. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Roy A.H., Rosemond A.D., Paul M.J., Leigh D.S. and Wallace J.B., 2003. Stream macroinvertebrate response to catchment urbanization (Georgia, USA). Freshwater Biol., 48, 329–346. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Sandin L., 2009. The effects of catchment land-use, near-stream vegetation, and river hydromorphology on benthic macroinvertebrate communities in a south-Swedish Catchment. Fundam. Appl. Limnol., 174, 75–87. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Silver P., Mccall C.B. and Wooster D., 2004. Habitat partitioning by Chironomid larvae in arrays of leaf patches in streams. J. North Am. Benthol. Soc., 23, 467–479. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Simião-Ferreira J., Demarco Jr. P., Mazão G., and Carvalho A.R., 2009. Chironomidae assemblage structure in relation to organic enrichment of an aquatic environment. Neotrop. Entomol., 38, 464–471. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Smith R.F. and Lamp W.O., 2008. Comparison of insect communities between adjacent headwater and main-stem streams in urban and rural watersheds. J. North Am. Benthol. Soc., 27, 161–175. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Sparovek G., Ranieri S.B.L., Gassner A., De-Maria I.C., Schnug E., Santos R.F. and Joubert A., 2002. A conceptual framework for the definition of the optimal width of riparian forests. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 90, 169–175. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Sponseller R.A., Benfield E.F. and Vallet H.M., 2001. Relationships between land use, spatial scale and stream macroinvertebrate communities. Freshwater Biol., 4, 1409–1424. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Stewart B.A., 2011. An assessment of the impacts of timber plantations on water quality and biodiversity values of Marbellup Brook, Western Australia. Environ. Monitor. Assess., 173, 941–953. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Trivinho-Strixino S. and Strixino G., 1995. Larvas de Chironomidae (Diptera) do estado de São Paulo: guia de identificação e diagnose dos gêneros, PP-ERN/UFSCar, São Carlos. [Google Scholar]
  • Tundisi J.G. and Tundisi T.M., 2008. Limnologia, Oficina de Textos, São Paulo. [Google Scholar]
  • Vannote R.L., Minshall G.W., Cummins K.W., Sedell J.R. and Gushing E., 1980. The river continuum concept. Can. J. Fish Aquat. Sci., 3, 130–137. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Vondracek B., Blann K.L., Cox C.B., Nerbonne J.F., Mumford K.G. and Nerbonne B.A., 2005. Land use, spatial scale, and stream systems: lessons from an agriculture region. Environ. Manage., 36, 775–791. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • von Schilleler D., Martin E. and Riera J.L., 2008. Nitrate retention and removal in Mediterranean streams with contrasting land uses: a 15N tracer study. Biogeosci. Discuss., 5, 3307–3346. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Washburn T. and Sanger D., 2011. Land use effects on macrobenthic communities in southeastern United States tidal creeks. Environ. Monitor. Assess., 180, 177–188. [CrossRef] [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.