Diversidad íctica del Parque Natural Municipal Gruta India, Misiones (Argentina)

Patricia Araya; Silvia Alicia Flores; Adriana Griselda Barboza; Marcelo Javier Serrano; Carlos Eduardo Kusmeluk

doi:10.30972/vet.3719223

Authors

Patricia Araya Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Químicas y Naturales. Félix de Azara 1552 5to piso Laboratorio 22. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7125-7204
Silvia Alicia Flores Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Químicas y Naturales. Félix de Azara 1552 5to piso Laboratorio 22. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0309-2372
Adriana Griselda Barboza Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Químicas y Naturales. Félix de Azara 1552 5to piso Laboratorio 22. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5909-8231
Marcelo Javier Serrano Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Químicas y Naturales. Félix de Azara 1552 5to piso Laboratorio 22. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8075-0319
Carlos Eduardo Kusmeluk Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Químicas y Naturales. Félix de Azara 1552 5to piso Laboratorio 22. https://orcid.org/0009-0001-3520-1908

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30972/vet.3719223

Keywords:

ichthyofauna, inland streams, endemism, conservation

Abstract

The Gruta India Municipal Natural Park is located in the municipality of Garuhapé, Misiones Province, Argentina, and its main purpose is the conservation of the biodiversity of the Parana Rainforest and the cultural heritage of the site. A reach of the Tres de Mayo stream flows through the protected area and was studied to determine the composition, structure, and conservation status of the fish community. Four seasonal sampling events were conducted between 2022 and 2023 using monofilament gill nets with mesh sizes of 2.5, 3, 4, and 5 cm between opposite knots, and a seine net and hand net in shallow areas with floating or emergent (palustrine) vegetation. Species diversity comprised 43 species belonging to the orders Characiformes, Siluriformes, Gymnotiformes, Cichliformes, Perciformes, and Clupeiformes. Alpha diversity (H′) reached a value of 3, while the non-parametric richness estimators Chao2 and Jackknife1 suggested that an additional 12 to 17 species remain undetected. Rank–abundance patterns revealed marked differences in fish assemblage structure among stream reaches, with the potamic reach exhibiting the highest species richness (33 species) and abundance (164 individuals). Similarity among sampling sites ranged from low to moderate (2–32%). Seven species were classified as common or abundant, whereas 29 rare species were predominantly recorded at sites under direct river influence. Six endemic species were recorded, including Rhamdella cainguae and Rineloricaria misionera, which are categorized as Vulnerable according to the categories and criteria of the IUCN Red List. These findings indicate that the stream functions as an important refuge for endemic and threatened ichthyofauna, highlighting its high ecological value and the need to implement basin-scale conservation strategies to ensure its long-term protection.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Albert JS, Tagliacollo VA, Dagosta F. Diversification of Neotropical Freshwater. Fishes Ann. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2020; 51: 27-53. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-011620-031032 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-011620-031032

2. Almirón A, Casciotta J, Ciotek L, Giorgis P. Guía de los peces del Parque Nacional Pre-Delta. 2da edición. Administración de Parques Nacionales, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires. 2015. p. 300.

3. Alonso F, Teran GE, Calviño PA, Serra A, Wilson S, Montes MM, Garcia, ID, Barneche JA, Ciotek L, Giorgis P, Casciotta JR. Expect the unexpected: a new species of killifish from a highly stochastic temporary wetland near Iguazú Falls (Cyprinodontiformes: Rivulidae). Can. J. Zool. 2024; 102(3): 298-314. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjz-2023-0132 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1139/cjz-2023-0132

4. American Veterinary Medical Association. Report of the AVMA panel on euthanasia. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 2001; 218: 669-696. https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.2001.218.669 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.2001.218.669

5. Araya P. Biodiversidad, relaciones biogeográficas y conservación de la ictiofauna de la provincia de Misiones –Argentina. Tesis Doctoral. Universidad Nacional de Misiones. RIDUNaM. 2017; p.177. Disponible en: https://rid.unam.edu.ar/handle/20.500.12219/2366

6. Araya P, Giraudo A, Hirt L. Peces endémicos de sistemas fluviales de la Selva Atlántica en la Argentina: Áreas prioritarias para su conservación. Ecol. Austral. 2021; 31: 475-490. https://doi.org/10.25260/EA.21.31.3.0.1344 DOI: https://doi.org/10.25260/EA.21.31.3.0.1344

7. Baigún CR. Impactos ecológicos y socioeconómicos de la construcción de represas sobre la ictiofauna y las pesquerías de los grandes ríos de América del Sur. En. Abraham EM, Quintana RD y Mataloni G. editores, Aguas + Humedales. Universidad Nacional de San Martín; 2018. p. 257-277.

8. Benítez M, Cerutti J, Donato E, Aichino D. First record of Leporinus tigrinus from the Middle Paraná River basin, Argentina. Ichthyol. Contrib. Peces Criollos. 2024; 87: 1-5. Disponible en: https://pecescriollos.de/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/ICP-87-Benitez-et-al-2024-Leporinus-tigrinus-first-record-for-AR.pdf

9. Cabrera AL. Regiones fitogeográficas argentinas. En: Kugler WF (ed.) Enciclopedia argentina de agricultura y jardinería. Tomo 2. 2da edición. Acme. Buenos Aires. Argentina. 1976; Fascículo I. p. 85.

10. Calcagnotto D, Schaefer SA, DeSalle R. Relationships among characiform fishes inferred from analysis of nuclear and mitochondrial gene sequences. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2005; 36: 135-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2005.01.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2005.01.004

11. Comité Intergubernamental Coordinador de los Países de la Cuenca del Plata. CIC. Ecosistemas acuáticos en la Cuenca del Plata. 1ra edición. Bs As: Comité Intergubernamental Coordinador de los Países de la Cuenca del Plata - CIC – OEA; 2017. p. 228.

12. Colwell RK. Statistical estimation of species richness and shared species for samples. EstimateS 9.1. 2013; recuperado de osf.io/su57f (29 de mayo de 2025).

13. Copatti CE, Copatti BR. Variação sazonal e diversidade de peixes do rio Cambará, Bacia do rio Uruguai. Biota Neotrop. 2011; 3 (1): 265-271. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1676-06032011000400023

14. Fagundes DC, Leal CG, Carvalho DR, Junqueira NT, Langeani F, Pompeu PS. The stream fish fauna from three regions of the Upper Paraná River basin. Biota Neotrop. 2015; 15(2):1-8. https://doi.org/10.1590/1676-06032015018714 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/1676-06032015018714

15. Feinsinger P. Designing field studies for biodiversity conservation. Washington (DC): Island Press. 2001. p. 236.

16. Flores S, Araya P, Hirt L. Fish diversity and community structure in a tributary stream of the Paraná River. Acta Limnol. Bras. 2009; 1: 57-66.

17. Flores SA, Araya PR, Serrano M, Barboza AG, Hirt LM. Estructura de la comunidad íctica del arroyo Paraíso afluente del río Uruguay. Misiones. Argentina. Biología Acuática. 2020; 34: 1-12. https://doi.org/10.24215/16684869e009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.24215/16684869e009

18. Kavalco KF, Pazza F. Aspectos biogeográficos de componentes da ictiofauna de América Central. ConScientia e Saúde. 2007; 6(1): 147-153. https://doi.org/10.5585/conssaude.v6i1.921 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5585/conssaude.v6i1.921

19. Koerber S, Litz O, Mirande M. Checklist of the Freshwater Fishes of Argentina, 2nd edition. CLOFFAR-2 - update 2. Ichthyol. Contrib. Peces Criollos. 2024; 88: 1-9.

20. Lasso CA. Los peces del alto río Negro, amazonía boliviana: composición y consideraciones ecológicas y biogeográficas. Interciencia. 2001; 26: 236-243. Disponible en: https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/los-peces-del-alto-río-negro-amazonía-boliviana/docview/210177911/se-2

21. López H, Morgan C, Ponte Gómez J. Biodiversidad y Distribución de la Ictiofauna Mesopotámica. INSUGEO. Miscelánea. 2005; 14: 311-353. Disponible en: http://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/handle/10915/50661

22. Lowe-McConnell RH. Estudos ecológicos de comunidades de peixes tropicais. Tradução: AE Vazzoler, A Agostinho, P Cunningham. São Paulo: EDUSP; 1999. p. 534.

23. Magurran AE, Khachonpisitsak S, Ahmad AB. Diversidad biológica de las comunidades de peces: patrones y procesos. J. of Fish Biology. 2011; 79(6): 1393-1412. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.2011.03091.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.2011.03091.x

24. Martínez Crovetto R. Esquema fitogeográfico de la provincia de Misiones (República Argentina). Bomplandia. 1963; 1: 171-215. https://doi.org/10.30972/bon.133941 DOI: https://doi.org/10.30972/bon.133941

25. Melo BF, Oliveira C, Benine RC. Phylogenetic relationships and taxonomic advances within the family Characidae (Teleostei: Characiformes). J. Fish Biol. 2024; 202(1): 1-37. https://doi.org/10.1093/zoolinnean/zlae101 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/zoolinnean/zlae101

26. Mirande JC, Koerber S. Checklist of the Freshwater Fishes of Argentina. 2nd edition. (CLOFFAR-2). Ichthyol. Contrib. Peces Criollos. 2020; 72:1-81.

27. Nelson JS, Grande TC, Wilson MV. Fishes of the World. 5th edition. John Wiley & Sons; 2016. p.752. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119174844

28. Neiff JJ. Large rivers of South America: toward the new approach. Verh. Int. Ver. Theor. Angew. Limnol. 1996; 26: 167-180. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03680770.1995.11900701

29. Reis RE, Kullander SO, Ferraris Jr CJ. Check list of the freshwater fishes of South Central and America. Porto Alegre: EDIPURCS. 2003; p. 742.

30. Říčan O, Piálek L, Almirón A, Casciotta J. Description of two new species forming a sympatric species pair of Crenicichla (Teleostei: Cichlidae) endemic to the Piray Guazú River in the Paraná Basin, Misiones, Argentina and belonging to the C. mandelburgeri species complex. Eur. J. Tax. 2023; 879: 38-63. https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2023.879.2159 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2023.879.2159

31. Rizzo A, Figini A, Salceda S, Tonni E. Ocupación humana holocénica en el noreste de la Mesopotamia: la Gruta Tres de Mayo (Garuhapé, Misiones, Argentina). Folia Histórica del Nordeste. Resistencia. IIGHI, CONICET - IH, UNNE. 2006; 16: 130-137. https://doi.org/10.30972/fhn.0163425 DOI: https://doi.org/10.30972/fhn.0163425

32. Sistema Federal de Áreas Protegidas. https://sifap.gob.ar/ Visita diciembre de 2024.

33. Stoffels RJ, Humphries P, Bond NR, Price AE. Fragmentation of lateral connectivity and fish population dynamics in large rivers. Fish Fish. 2022; 23: 680-696. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12641 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12641

34. Stoffers T, Buijse AD, Verreth JA, Nagelkerke LA. Environmental requirements and heterogeneity of rheophilic fish nursery habitats in European lowland rivers: Current insights and future challenges. Fish Fish. 2022; 23(1): 162-182. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12606 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12606

35. UICN. Categorías y Criterios de la Lista Roja de la UICN: Versión 3.1. The IUCN Red List. (version 3.1) https://www.iucnredlist.org/es Junio 2024.

36. Vannote, RL, Minshall GW, Cummins KW, Sedell JR, Cushing CE. The river continuum concept. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1980; 37: 130-137. https://doi.org/10.1139/f80-017 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1139/f80-017