簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

研究生: 劉芳如
Liu, Fang-Ru
論文名稱: 蓮華池地區上游溪流周邊土地利用及河道環境特性與兩棲類群聚的關係
The relationships between adjacent land-use, in-stream properties, and amphibian assemblages in low order streams of Lien-Hua-Chih
指導教授: 侯平君
Hou, Ping-Chun Lucy
共同指導教授: 王一匡
Wang, Yi-Kuang
學位類別: 碩士
Master
系所名稱: 生物科學與科技學院 - 生物多樣性研究所
Institute of Biodiversity
論文出版年: 2010
畢業學年度: 98
語文別: 英文
論文頁數: 66
中文關鍵詞: 溪流兩棲類棲地河岸緩衝帶溪流水域型態渠道化
外文關鍵詞: Stream associated amphibian, Habitat loss, Riparian buffer zone, Mesohabitat, Embankment
相關次數: 點閱:102下載:8
分享至:
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報
  • 棲地破壞是造成全球生物多樣性下降的主要原因,因此瞭解生物與棲地環境的關係為提供物種保育及棲地經營的重要基礎。溪流生態系提供兩棲類重要的水域生殖場及陸域棲息地,但人為活動往往改變了這兩種棲地進而影響兩棲類群聚。在台灣,整合溪流水陸域環境與兩棲類關聯性的探討較為缺乏。本研究於2008年5月至2009年7月,在蓮華池地區的兩條上游溪流設置了17個長度為30公尺的河段,記錄河道內的兩棲類物種及個體數與水陸域環境因子,以了解陸域土地利用與水域之環境特性(溪寬、河道形狀、底質和人工構造物等)是否與溪流中兩棲類的多樣性及群聚組成有關。為了解多寬的河岸緩衝帶可能保護大部分的兩棲類,我比較不同寬度及範圍的河岸帶土地使用與兩棲類組成及主要物種密度的相關性。此外,將河段細分為三個10公尺區塊,分析小尺度下主要物種與底質和水域型態的關係。研究結果顯示:在森林為主要地景之上游溪流,周邊低度的人為土地利用與兩棲類多樣性為正相關,可能是人為利用地提供不同類型之棲地供溪流與靜水域繁殖物種使用。與河道內兩棲類群聚組成有關之主要因子為濱岸土地利用型態、河道內堤防化程度(遮陰植被多寡)和河道特性,如大型底質密度及河道形狀。根據物種對於濱岸土地利用的反應可將兩棲類物種分為三類:森林類、開墾(干擾)類、無反應類。森林型兩棲類物種(斯文豪氏赤蛙、古氏赤蛙、腹斑蛙)的密度,與河岸50公尺內之林地比例成正相關,並與人為土地利用比例呈負相關。各主要物種之密度在小尺度下,與溪流內部之環境特性如水域型態及大型底質密度有顯著的相關性,但不同物種的關聯性不同。在森林為主要地景的上游溪流,中度的開發增加區域內之兩棲類多樣性,但對於依賴森林的物種,未來在管理上,可優先保留50公尺內的濱岸森林或植被。另一方面河道內部的棲地管理,可依據可能出現的物種因地制宜,底質的變化與多樣化的水域型態能提供具不同棲地需求的物種使用。

    Knowledge about organism-habitat association is important to conservation and management of a species, especially when habitat loss is one of the major threats to global biodiversity. Stream systems providing critical resources for amphibians are often degraded and modified by anthropogenic activities which may have adverse effects on stream-related amphibians. This study investigated the relationships between amphibian assemblages and stream-riparian properties in a headwater system located in Central Taiwan from May 2008 to July 2009. Seventeen reaches along the two streams were setup to survey amphibian assemblages and environmental properties monthly. Land-uses in the riparian zones encompassing different widths were also determined, so that the amphibian-habitat association in various widths of riparian zones could be analyzed. Besides, the amphibian-habitat associations in streams were also analyzed at a smaller scale by dividing the reach into three subunits. The results showed that moderate development along streams in a forest dominated landscape can increase amphibian diversity in the streams by creating different habitats for the stream and pond breeding species. The amphibian assemblages in streams were associated with in-stream properties (such as embankment and channel characteristics) and the adjacent land-use. The amphibian species can be grouped according to their associations with the land-use variables as forest, neutral, and tolerant species. Densities of the forest species, Rana adenopleura, Limnonectes kuhlii, and Rana swinhoana increased with higher riparian forest cover within 50 m. Density of Rana latouchii also increased with closed canopy. Besides, densities of most species showed weak but significant correlation with emergent substrates and mesohabitat variables at the smaller scale. These results suggest a buffer zone of at least 50 m intact forest is needed for the forest species. Moreover, the management strategies for small scale habitats should be designed according to the species occurring in the focal reaches. Maintaining diverse substrates and mesohabitats in reaches may increase amphibian diversity in reaches.

    CONTENT Page CHINESE ABSTRACT…………………………………………………I ENGLICH ABSTRACT………………………………………………...II ACKNOWLEDGMENTS………………………………………………IV CONTENT………………………………………………………………VI LIST OF TABLES………………………………………………………VIII LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………......X LIST OF APPENDICES………………………………………………..XI INTRODUCTION 1 MATERIALS AND METHODS 5 Study area 5 Amphibian survey 5 Measurement of environmental variables 6 Data preparation and analyses 8 RESULTS 12 Amphibian richness and abundance 12 Riparian land-use 12 In-stream properties 13 Reach scale properties (land-use and in-stream) and amphibians 14 Land-use in riparian zones of different width and amphibians 16 Finer (subunit) scale in-stream properties and amphibians 18 DISCUSSIONS 19 Reach scale properties (land-use, in-stream) and amphibians 19 Land-use of riparian zone of different widths and amphibians 21 Finer (subunit) scale in-stream properties and amphibians 24 Limitations of this study 26 Implications for amphibian conservation 26 BIBLIOGRAPHY 28 LIST OF TABLES Tables Page 1. Categories of Land-use type…………………………………………………………34 2. Mesohabitat categories were classified according to depth, turbulence, and position relative to the main wetted area……………………………………………………..35 3. Variables of reach scale analyses and their calculations……………………………..36 4. Summary of land-use and in-stream properties of the 15 study reaches in Lien-Hua-Chih………………………………………………………………………38 5. Variables of subunit scale analyses and their calculations……………………...........41 6. The list of amphibian species occurred in Lien-Hua-Chih stream, their scientific names, and the codes used in analysis or tables……………………………………..42 7. Species abundance, species richness, and Shannon index of each sampling reach in Streams of LienHuaChih…………………………………………………………….43 8. Pearson correlation coefficients among land-use variables………………………….44 9. Pearson Correlation coefficients among in-stream habitat variables…………...........45 10. RDA results of the relationships between the land use in 30-m wide zone, in-stream variables, and the amphibian assemblages in Lien-Hua-Chih....................46 11. RDA results of the relationships between the land use in 50-m wide zone, in-stream variables, and the amphibian assemblages in Lien-Hua-Chih....................47 12. RDA results of the relationships between the land use in 100-m wide zone, in-stream variables, and the amphibian assemblages in Lien-Hua-Chih....................48 13. RDA results of the relationships between the land use in 200-m wide zone, in-stream variables, and the amphibian assemblages in Lien-Hua-Chih..................49 14. Inter-set correlations of 12 environmental variables with the first four ordination axes of redundancy analysis (RDA) for the 30-m wide zone and in-stream variables……………………………………………………………………………..50 15. Inter-set correlations of 12 environmental variables with the first four ordination axes of redundancy analysis (RDA) for the 50-m wide zone and in-stream variables……………………………………………………………………………..51 16. Inter-set correlations of 12 environmental variables with the first four ordination axes of redundancy analysis (RDA) for 100-m wide zone and in-stream variables……………………………………………………………………………..52 17. Inter-set correlations of 12 environmental variables with the first four ordination axes of redundancy analysis (RDA) for 200-m wide zone and in-stream habitat……………………………………………………………………………….53 18. RDA results of relationships between land-use variables in 4 different riparian zones and the amphibian assemblages Lien-Hua-Chih……………....…….54 19. The Spearman rank correlation coefficients between abundant species densities and land-use within 4 riparian zones and 4 terrestrial bands……………………….55 20. The Spearman Rank correlation coefficients between amphibian species and habitat variables in 10m subunit………………………………………………56 LIST OF FIGURES Figures Page 1. Map showing locations of the 17 study reaches and land-use types of the study area in Lein-Hua-Chih, Taiwan.……………………………………57 2. Illustrations of different zones and bands in adjacent land of a reach…………..58 3. The measurement of channel width, wetted channel width, depth, and current velocity………………………………………………………………………….59 4. The points of stream canopy closure measurement……………………………...60 5. Correlations of environmental variables and reach locations indicating upstream-downstream (longitudinal) patterns in streams in Lien-Hua-Chih…………………………………………….................................61 6. Biplots from redundancy analysis (30m land-use plus in-stream variables) using the variables (p<0.10) at reach scale………………………………………62 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendices Page 1. Land-use variables of each reach………………………………………………63 2. In-stream variables of each reach………………………………………………65 3. Species abundance, species richness, and Shannon index of each sampling month…………………………………………………………………………..66

    Adams SB. 2005. Instream Movements by Boreal Toads (Bufo boreas boreas). Herpetological Reviews 36: 27-33.
    Barrett K, Guyer C. 2008. Differential responses of amphibians and reptiles in riparian and stream habitats to land use disturbances in western Georgia, USA. Biological Conservation 141: 2290-2300.
    Becker CG, Fonseca CR, Haddad CFB, Prado PI. 2010. Habitat split as a cause of local population declines of amphibians with aquatic larvae. Conservation Biology 24: 287-294.
    Brandao RA, Araujo AFB. 2008. Changes in anuran species richness and abundance resulting from hydroelectric dam flooding in Central Brazil. Biotropica 40: 263-266.
    Burbrink FT, Phillips CA, Heske EJ. 1998. A riparian zone in southern Illinois as a potential dispersal corridor for reptiles and amphibians. Biological Conservation 86: 107-115.
    Chang C-W. 2005. A study on resource partitioning and the effects of human disturbance on resource utilization among frogs in a stream of Northern Taiwan. Master These. National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei.
    Chang Y-J. 2007. Study on the community structure of frogs in the lower elevations of Hualien. Master thesis. National Hualien University of Education, Hualien.
    Chen H-C. 2005. The benthic algae assemblages and diets of tadpoles in stream of Lien-Hua-Chih. Master Thesis. National Changhua University of Education, Changhua.
    Cheng C-C, Wu C-D, Wang S-F. 2005. Application of Markov and Logit Models on Monitoring Landscape Changes. Taiwan Journal of Forest Science 20: 29-36.
    Chu J. 1996. A study on frog's community in streams of Northern Taiwan. Master Thesis. National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei.
    Clemento AJ, Anderson EC, Boughton D, Girman D, Garza JC. 2009. Population genetic structure and ancestry of Oncorhynchus mykiss populations above and below dams in south-central California. Conservation Genetics 10: 1321-1336.
    Corn PS, Bury RB. 1989. Logging in Westerm Oregon- responses of headwater habitats and stream amphibians. Forest Ecology and Management 29: 39-57.
    Corn PS, Bury RB, Hyde EJ, eds. 2003. Conservation of North American stream amphibians Washington, DC: Smithsonian books.
    Council of Agriculture Executive Yuan, Taipei City, Taiwan, R.O.C. 2003. Soil and water Conservation Act.
    deMaynadier PG, Hunter ML. 2000. Road effects on amphibian movements in a forested landscape. Natural Areas Journal 20: 56-65.
    Dudgeon D, et al. 2006. Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges. Biological Reviews 81: 163-182.
    Fredericksen NJ, Fredericksen TS. 2004. Impacts of selective logging on amphibians in a Bolivian tropical humid forest. Forest Ecology and Management 191: 275-282.
    Frissell CA, Liss WJ, Warren CE, Hurley MD. 1986. A Hierarchical framework for stream habitat classification: viewing streams in a watershed context. Environmental Management 10: 199-214.
    Gascon C, Lovejoy TE, Bierregaard RO, Malcolm JR, Stouffer PC, Vasconcelos HL, Laurance WF, Zimmerman B, Tocher M, Borges S. 1999. Matrix habitat and species richness in tropical forest remnants. Biological Conservation 91: 223-229.
    Gibbs JP. 1998. Amphibian movements in response to forest edges, roads, and streambeds in southern New England. Journal of Wildlife Management 62: 584-589.
    Gomez DM, Anthony RG. 1996. Amphibian and reptile abundance in riparian and upslope areas of five forest types in western Oregon. Northwest Science 70: 109-119.
    Gosset C, Travade F, Durif C, Rives J, Elie P. 2005. Tests of two types of bypass for downstream migration of eels at a small hydroelectric power plant. River Research and Applications 21: 1095-1105.
    Gregory KJ. 2006. The human role in changing river channels. Geomorphology 79: 172-191.
    Herrmann HL, Babbitt KJ, Baber MJ, Congalton RG. 2005. Effects of landscape characteristics on amphibian distribution in a forest-dominated landscape. Biological Conservation 123: 139-149.
    Holbrook CM, Zydlewski J, Gorsky D, Shepard SL, Kinnison MT. 2009. Movements of prespawn adult Atlantic salmon near hydroelectric dams in the Lower Penobscot River, Maine. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 29: 495-505.
    Hsieh H-I, Yuan H-W, Wang L-P, Ding T-S. 2006. Species diversity of terrestrial vertebrates in primary forests and forest plantations in Sitou, Central Taiwan. Quarterly Journal of Chinese Forestry 39: 421-436.
    Huang C-Y, Hou P-CL. 2004. Density and diversity of litter amphibians in a monsoon forest of southern Taiwan. Zoological Studies 43: 759-802.
    IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.1. <http://www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded on 11 March 2010.
    Kam YC. 1999. Amphibian communities in the Guandaushi forest ecosystem. Quarterly Journal of Chinese Forestry 21: 33-40.
    Kam YC, Chen TC. 2000. Abundance and movement of a riparian frog (Rana swinhoana) in a subtropical forest of Guandau Stream, Taiwan. Zoological Studies 39: 67-76.
    Kam YC, Chen TC, Yang JT, Yu FC, Yu KM. 1998. Seasonal activity, reproduction, and diet of a riparian frog (Rana swinhoana) from a subtropical forest in Taiwan. Journal of Herpetology 32: 447-452.
    King J, Cambray JA, Impson ND. 1998. Linked effects of dam-released floods and water temperature on spawning of the Clanwilliam yellowfish Barbus capensis. Hydrobiologia 384: 245-265.
    Kluber MR, Olson DH, Puettmann KJ. 2008. Amphibian distribution in riparian and upslope areas and their habitat associations on managed forest landscapes in the oregon coast range. Forest Ecology and Management 256: 529-535.
    Kupferberg SJ. 1996. Hydrologic and geomorphic factors affecting conservation of a river- breeding frog (Rana Boylii). Ecological Applications 6: 1332-1344.
    Kuramoto M, Wang CS, Yu HT. 1984. Breeding, larval morphology and experimental hybridization of Taiwanese brown frogs, Rana-longicrus and Rana- sauteri. Journal of Herpetology 18: 387-395.
    Lai S-J. 2002. Altitudinal effects on life history variations of Sauter’s frog Rana sauteri Boulenger, 1909 in Taiwan. Doctoral dissertation. National Taiwan University, Taipei.
    Lai Y-F, Liaw S-C. 2005. Public participation in stream conservation including organizational implementation and residential response in Wucheng Village, Nantou County. Journal of Chinese Soil and Water Conservation 36: 55-67.
    Lemckert F. 1999. Impacts of selective logging on frogs in a forested area of northern New South Wales. Biological Conservation 89: 321-328.
    Lemckert F, Brassil T. 2000. Movements and habitat use of the endangered giant barred river frog (Mixophyes iteratus) and the implications for its conservation in timber production forests. Biological Conservation 96: 177-184.
    Li KW, Lee DN, Huang WT, Weng CF. 2006. Temperature and humidity alter prolactin receptor expression in the skin of toad (Bufo bankorensis and Bufo melanostictus). Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology A-Molecular & Integrative Physiology 145: 509-516.
    Lin C-Y. 2001. Reproductive ecology and population distribution of brown treefrog (Buergeria robusta) in Shuang-Si River of Taipei. Master Thesis. National Taiwan University, Taipei.
    Lin W-L, Tsai H-H, Wu H-J. 2007. Effect of ditch living thing by process of original structure replacement by RC irrigation ditch. Journal of Chinese Soil and Water Conservation 38: 31-42.
    Lind AJ, Welsh J, H. H, Wilson RA. 1996. The effects of a dam on breeding habitat and egg survival of the foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii) in Northwestern California. Herpetological Reviews 27: 62-67.
    Liu C-L. 2009. Amphibian diversity in two riparian forest habitats in central Taiwan. Master Thesis. Tunghai University, Taichung.
    Malmqvist B, Rundle S. 2002. Threats to the running water ecosystems of the world. Environmental Conservation 29: 134-153.
    Mazerolle MJ, Vos CC. 2006. Choosing the safest route: Frog orientation in an agricultural landscape. Journal of Herpetology 40: 435-441.
    Mazerolle MJ, Huot M, Gravel M. 2005. Behavior of amphibians on the road in response to car traffic. Herpetologica 61: 380-388.
    Morita K, Yamamoto S. 2002. Effects of habitat fragmentation by damming on the persistence of stream-dwelling charr populations. Conservation Biology 16: 1318-1323.
    Olson DH, Anderson PD, Frissell CA, Welsh HH, Bradford DF. 2007. Biodiversity management approaches for stream-riparian areas: Perspectives for Pacific Northwest headwater forests, microclimates, and amphibians. Forest Ecology and Management 246: 81-107.
    Parasiewicz P. 2007. Using MesoHABSIM to develop reference habitat template and ecological management scenarios. River Research and Applications 23: 924-932.
    Penczak T, Gomes LC. 2000. Impact of engineering on fish diversity and community structure in the Gwda River basin, north Poland. Polskie Archiwum Hydrobiologii 47: 131-141.
    Penczak T, Glowacki L, Galicka W, Koszalinski H. 1998. A long-term study (1985-1995) of fish populations in the impounded Warta River, Poland. Hydrobiologia 368: 157-173.
    Petranka JW, Smith CK. 2005. A functional analysis of streamside habitat use by southern Appalachian salamanders: Implications for riparian forest management. Forest Ecology and Management 210: 443-454.
    Pon LB, Hinch SG, Cooke SJ, Patterson DA, Farrell AP. 2009. A comparison of the physiological condition, and fishway passage time and success of migrant adult sockeye salmon at Seton River Dam, British Columbia, under three operational water discharge rates. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 29: 1195-1205.
    Rypel AL, Bayne DR. 2009. Hydrologic habitat preferences of select southeastern USA fishes resilient to river ecosystem fragmentation. Ecohydrology 2: 419-427.
    Schmetterling DA, Young MK. 2008. Summer movements of Boreal Toads (Bufo boreas boreas) in two western Montana basins. Journal of Herpetology 42: 111-123.
    Semlithch RD, Bodie JR. 2003. Biological criteria for buffer zones around wetlands and riparian habitats for amphibians and reptiles. Conservation Biology 17: 1219-1228.
    Shellberg JG, Bolton SM, Montgomery DR. 2010. Hydrogeomorphic effects on bedload scour in bull char (Salvelinus confluentus) spawning habitat, western Washington, USA. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 67: 626-640.
    Sinsch U. 1988. Temporal spacing of breeding activity in the Natterjack toad, Bufo-calamita. Oecologia 76: 399-407.
    Smiley PC, Knight SS, Shields FD, Cooper CM. 2009. Influence of gully erosion control on amphibian and reptile communities within riparian zones of channelized streams. Ecohydrology 2: 303-312.
    Stoddard MA, Hayes JP. 2005. The influence of forest management on headwater stream amphibians at multiple spatial scales. Ecological Applications 15: 811-823.
    Suaz-Ortuno I, Alvarado-Diaz J, Martinez-Ramos M. 2008. Effects of conversion of dry tropical forest to agricultural mosaic on herpetofaunal assemblages. Conservation Biology 22: 362-374.
    Taiwan Forest Bureau. 1992. Investigation report of check dams recent status in Taiwan. Council of Agricultural, Executive Yuan, Taipei, Taiwan..
    Taiwan Water Resources Agency. 2005. The existing works for river flood control. Ministry of Econoic Affairs, Executive Yuan, Taipei, Taiwan
    Tarkus M, Volkmann C, Drexler SS, Waidbacher H, Straif M. 2010. Assessment of the ecological functionality of anthropogenically created habitats in the impoundment of the hydropower plant Freudenau (Vienna, Austria) with bi- and multivariate statistical analyses. Zoologia 27: 92-98.
    ter Braak, C. J. F. and Smilauer P. 2002. CANOCO reference manual and CanoDraw for Windows user's guide: software for canonical community ordination (version 4.5). Microcomputer Power, Ithaca, NY, USA
    Tsai Y-F. 2002. Sexual size dimorphism of the fanged frog Rana kuhlii. Maste Thesis. Tunghai University, Taichung.
    Tsuji H, Kawamichi T. 1996. Breeding habitats of a stream-breeding toad, Bufo torrenticola, in an Asian mountain torrent. Journal of Herpetology 30: 451-454.
    Vallan D. 2000. Influence of forest fragmentation on amphibian diversity in the nature reserve of Ambohitantely, highland Madagascar. Biological Conservation 96: 31-43.
    Van Dyke F, ed. 2003. The Conservation of Habitat and Landscape. In Conservation biology: fundations, concepts, applications 1 st ed (pp. 201-229).: McGraw Hill, New York.
    Wang C-M. 1990. Basic principles and techniques of fish habitat survey in river system. Council of Agriculture, Executive Yuan, Taipei, Taiwan,
    Ward RL, Anderson JT, Petty JT. 2008. Effects of road crossings on stream and streamside salamanders. Journal of Wildlife Management 72: 760-771.
    Welsh HH, Ollivier LM. 1998. Stream amphibians as indicators of ecosystem stress: A case study from California's redwoods. Ecological Applications 8: 1118-1132.
    Welsh HHJ, Lind AJ. 2002. Multiscale habitat relationships of stream amphibians in the Klamath-Siskiyou Region of California and Oregon. The Journal of Wildlife Management 66: 581-602.
    Willson JD, Dorcas ME. 2003. Effects of habitat disturbance on stream salamanders: Implications for buffer zones and watershed management. Conservation Biology 17: 763-771.
    Wohl E. 2006. Human impacts to mountain streams. Geomorphology 79: 217-248.
    Yang Y-J, ed. 2008. A field guide to the frogs and toads of Taiwan. Council of Agriculture, Executive Yuan, Taipei, Taiwan,

    下載圖示 校內:2014-08-30公開
    校外:2014-08-30公開
    QR CODE