Fish–habitat relationships and fish conservation in small
coastal streams in southern Spain
! PRENDAa
MIGUEL CLAVEROa,b,*, FRANCISCO BLANCO-GARRIDOa and JOSE
a
Departamento de Biolog!ıa Ambiental y Salud Pu!blica, Universidad de Huelva, Campus Universitario de El Carmen,
Avda. Andaluc!ıa s/n, 21071 Huelva, Spain
b
Departamento de Biolog!ıa Aplicada, Estacio!n Biolo!gica de Don*ana, CSIC, Pabello!n del Peru!,
Avda. Mar!ıa Luisa s/n, 41013 Seville, Spain
ABSTRACT
1. Studies dealing with the fish fauna of coastal streams are scarce in the scientific literature,
particularly those from Mediterranean climates. Owing to their small size, these systems suffer
extreme seasonal fluctuations, following the typical Mediterranean flood–drought cycle and leading
to a high risk of extinction to freshwater fish.
2. This work analyses fish distribution in 14 stream stretches belonging to eight basins in the
northern sector of the Strait of Gibraltar (southern Spain). Fish–habitat relationships were studied
through multivariate ordination techniques at two scales: basin and stretch.
3. A principal components analysis clearly discriminated larger and more sinuous basins from
smaller and steeper ones. This ordination was related to the non-migratory freshwater fish species
richness and to the total number of fish species present in the middle reaches of each basin.
4. The main sources of variation in community composition and habitat characteristics in the
different stretches were related to a clear upstream–downstream gradient, along which total species
richness increased.
5. These small coastal basins are inhabited by two highly endangered species, Andalusian
toothcarp (Aphanius baeticus) and Iberian chub (Squalius pyrenaicus), and have similar or higher
overall freshwater species richness than larger adjacent basins. The near absences of flow regulation
and introduced species make these streams one of the few types of Iberian aquatic system where
unaltered fish–habitat relationships can be studied.
KEY WORDS:
Mediterranean streams; local extinctions; freshwater fish; longitudinal gradients; small river basins
INTRODUCTION
The characteristics of stream fish assemblages are determined by abiotic and biotic processes operating at
multiple spatial and temporal scales (Matthews, 1998). In streams with marked environmental variation,
*Correspondence to: Miguel Clavaro, Departmento de Biolog!ıa Ambiental y Salud Publica, Universidad de Huelva, Campus
Universitario de El Carmen, Avd/Andaluc!ıa s/n, 21071 Huelva, Spain. E-mail: miguel.clavero@dbasp.uhu.es
.
local habitat features may be less important in structuring fish communities than large-scale factors
(Angermeier and Schlosser, 1989). This seems to be the case for streams in Mediterranean climates, which
suffer predictable seasonal drought events of greatly variable intensity from year to year (Gasith and Resh,
1999). The harsh conditions imposed by summer droughts in Mediterranean streams may act as a critical
filter for their inhabitance by freshwater fish species (Poff, 1997; Magalha* es et al., 2002b). In fact, it has
been suggested that the variation in fish assemblages in Mediterranean streams can be explained by largescale factors, particularly the position of a river stretch within a catchment (Filipe et al., 2002, Magalha* es
et al., 2002a).
Most studies on stream fish undertaken in the Iberian Peninsula have focused on low-order streams in large
basins (Rinco! n et al., 1990; Pires et al., 1999; Godinho et al., 2000; Bravo et al., 2001). Though there is a high
probability of extinction of fish populations occupying these streams, it can be compensated by recolonization
from larger watercourses downstream (Osborne and Wiley, 1992; Gotelli and Taylor, 1999a). In contrast,
small coastal streams may contain impoverished freshwater fish communities owing to the impossibility of
recolonization after local extinctions, and the frequent domination of fish assemblages by diadromous species
(McDowall, 1998). As in other areas (Martin-Smith and Laird, 1998), these species-poor systems have rarely
been studied, mainly because of a generalized ‘more is better’ syndrome (Matthews, 1998).
Mediterranean rivers and streams have long suffered intense alterations due to the high water demand in
these densely populated areas and to the unpredictable availability of this resource (Hamdy et al., 1995). In
addition, many Mediterranean Iberian rivers and streams are now heavily polluted by undiluted urban and
agricultural effluents (Prenda and Gallardo, 1996; Prat and Munne! , 2000). Impoundment is also a
widespread phenomenon, and most large- and medium-sized watercourses have regulated flows and are
fragmented by large dams (Prenda et al., 2002). This structural, physical and chemical deterioration of
fluvial ecosystems is one of the main threats to Iberian freshwater fish fauna (Doadrio, 2001), commonly
acting synergistically with introduced species (Ross, 1991; Corbacho and Sa! nchez, 2001). Coastal streams
in some southern and western areas are amongst the few Iberian Mediterranean watercourses that maintain
relatively unpolluted waters, unaltered flow and pristine fish communities. The conservation value of these
streams has rarely been stressed (Clavero et al., 2002) although they provide habitat for endangered species
and are one of the few systems where unaltered fish–habitat relationships can be studied (Doadrio, 2001).
However, these streams are strongly threatened by increasing population density in coastal areas, and the
development of tourism.
This study analyses fish distribution and assemblage structure in eight coastal basins in southern Spain.
These streams are very small (in general shorter than 10 km), thus suffering extreme flow fluctuations
following the characteristic Mediterranean flood–drought cycle. In most summers even larger streams
become reduced to a few isolated freshwater pools (Clavero et al., 2002). The specific objectives of this
study were:
1. To describe the distribution of fish in the area, with special emphasis on freshwater species, and to assess
their conservation value.
2. To link freshwater fish species distribution and richness to the characteristics of different basins.
3. To analyse changes in fish assemblages along an abrupt upstream–downstream gradient in the short
length (55 km) from headwater conditions to estuarine and tidal-influenced areas.
METHODS
Study area
The study area is located in the southern tip of the Iberian Peninsula, comprising a coastal area of about
30 x 6 km2 (Figure 1). The area is characterized by a steep relief, reaching more than 800 m a.s.l. in less than
Ib erian Peninsula
Algeciras
Miel
8
2
Jara
1
13
*
12
3
*
9
11
4
5
N
14
7
6
Western b asins
10
*
Eastern b asins
Tarifa
10 km
Figure 1. Location of the stretches used for fish sampling. Black circles denote upper stretches and white circles denote lower stretches.
Stretches marked with an asterisk were sampled on only a single occasion and were used in the basin analysis, but not in the stretch
analysis (see Methods).
a 6 km straight line from the coast. Elevated areas are mainly composed of sandstone, producing acidic,
nutrient-poor soils, and the lowlands are characterized by loamy or marly non-acidic substrata (Ibarra,
1993; Ojeda et al., 2000). The average annual rainfall is highly variable (1396, 1019, 737 and 616 mm at the
four meteorological stations included in the study area) owing to the abrupt relief, though the lack of
precipitation during summer is a common feature (Ibarra, 1993). However, the interception of moist southeasterly winds, which are dominant during summer, can reduce to some extent the impact of summer
drought in some zones (Ojeda et al., 2000).
Fish sampling
Fish were surveyed in 13 stretches of eight basins within the study area (Figure 1). Stretches were classified
as ‘lower’ or ‘upper’ by their minimum distance to the tidal influenced area (less than or greater than
500 m). Extensive surveys were performed in March, June and October 2001 and May 2002, each one of
them covering most of the study stretches. An additional limited survey was performed in January 2002.
Fish were captured using electrofishing, fyke nets or both techniques (Table 1). Electrofishing was carried
out whenever water conductivity allowed it, using backpack (230 V, 1 A) or standard (230 V,
1–2 A) electrofishing gear. Fyke nets were used overnight (set around 9 p.m. and lifted around 9 a.m.)
and always in pairs with different mesh sizes (15 mm and 7 mm). Between 5 and 10 pairs of nets were placed
in each of the stretches in the different surveys. Owing to the heterogeneity of sampling methods and effort
used, only presence–absence data were considered in analysing the structure of fish assemblages (Belliard
et al., 1997; Pires et al., 1999).
Captured fish were identified and then released, though some fish samples were eventually frozen and
taken to the laboratory to allow further measurements and identification. Identified species were classified
Table 1. List of the stretches studied, grouped by basin. The fishing effort employed during electrofishing (length) or net sampling
(number of pairs of nets) in each stretch is also shown, together with the total number of fish captured by the two methods. Stretch
codes are the same as those in Figure 1
Stretch
Basin
Code
Electrofishing
Fyke nets
Upper Valle
Lower Valle
Upper Jara
Lower Jara
Los Lances Beach
Lower Vega
Upper Vega
Upper Guadalmes!ı (I)
Upper Guadalmes!ı (II)
Lower Guadalmes!ı
Maraber
Lobo
P!ıcaro
Miel
Valle
Valle
Jara
Jara
–
Vega
Vega
Guadalmes!ı
Guadalmes!ı
Guadalmes!ı
Maraber
Lobo
P!ıcaro
Miel
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
333 m
–
692 m
–
–
824 m
574 m
100 m
220 m
479 m
150 m
100 m
460 m
150 m
23
24
28
23
26
30
–
–
–
28
–
–
–
–
Total
3982 m
182 pairs
Captures (individuals)
3048
3220
pairs
pairs
pairs
pairs
pairs
pairs
pairs
as ‘freshwater’ or ‘estuarine-diadromous’ species. The number of non-migratory freshwater species and the
total number of fish species present in middle reaches (including both freshwater and diadromous species)
were recorded in the different basins. Total, freshwater and estuarine-diadromous species richness were also
calculated in each stretch and survey. This number was a minimum estimate, since different species of the
genus Liza (Mugilidae) were treated as a single species, owing to difficult field identification.
Habitat characterization
Two different approaches were used to describe fish habitat. First, a physiographical description of each
of the studied basins (macrohabitat) was made using data provided by Ibarra (1993) (Table 2). Second,
13 habitat variables were measured in each of the stretches (mesohabitat) surveyed; these were recorded at
5–10 points per survey separated by 20 m within the area where electrofishing or net sampling was
performed (Table 2). These mesohabitat variables included physical and chemical parameters (temperature,
conductivity, pH, dissolved oxygen and turbidity), stream-bed and flow descriptors (substrate coarseness,
width, depth and water velocity) and riparian vegetation cover (herbaceous, shrubs and trees). The
availability of a refuge for fish was also estimated as the area (in metres squared) that could offer effective
cover (Prenda et al., 1996) in a 4 m wide band perpendicular to the stream channel.
Statistical analysis
Two different analyses of fish distribution were performed. The first one was made at the level of the river
basin. Physiographical descriptor variables of the different basins were summarized by means of principal
components analysis (PCA). The resulting principal components (PCbasin) were related to primary
freshwater fish richness and number of fish species occupying middle stretches of each basin.
The second analysis included all stretches sampled, except those sampled on a single occasion (see
Figure 1). This analysis was based on a presence–absence matrix, which summarized data from
electrofishing and net sampling. To extract the main sources of variation in the composition of fish
Table 2. Environmental variables used to characterize the basins and the stretches where fish sampling was undertaken
Stretchb
Basin variablea
2
Basin area A (km )
Main channel (MC) length L (km)
MC sinuosity A/L
Elongation factor (Schumm, 1956)
Drainage density (km km–2)
(Horton, 1945)
MC slope (m/1000L)
Order at mouth (Strahler, 1964)
N order-1 watercourses
a
b
Variable
Method
Temperature (8C)
Conductivity (mS cm–1)
Turbidity (FTU)
Dissolved oxygen (mg L–1 and %)
pH
YSI model 55
Crison CM 35
Hanna Instruments HI 93703
YSI model 55
Crison pH-metre 507
Water velocity (m s–1)
Depth (cm)
Width (m)
Substrate coarseness (1–9)
Herbaceous cover (%)
Shrub cover (%)
Tree cover (%)
Fish refuge (m2 in a 4 m band)
Floating object, three replicates
Rigid meter, six measurements
Flexible meter
Wentworth scale, six measurements
Visual estimate, two or three observations
Visual estimate, two or three observations
Visual estimate, two or three observations
Visual estimate, two or three observations
Variables recorded for eight basins.
Measures taken every 20 m, 5–10 times per stretch and survey.
Table 3. Distribution of fish species or families in the study area. The stretch numbers are the same as in Figure 1. Species marked with
an asterisk were not included in the DCA of fish assemblages
Stretch
Western basins
1
Fish species/family
Freshwater
Chub
Loach
Barbel
Andalousian toothcarp*
Mosquitofish*
Squalius pyrenaicus
Cobitis paludica
Barbus sclateri
Apahnius baeticus
Gambusia holbrooki
Estuarine diadromous
Eel
Sandsmelt
Grey mullets
Sea bass
Common goby
Flatfish
Pipefish*
White bream*
Anguilla anguilla
Atherina boyeri
Fam. Mugilidae
Dicentrarchus spp.
Pomatoschistus spp.
Fam. Soleidae
Syngnathus abaster
Diplodus sargus
2
3
4
Eastern basins
5
+
+
+
6
7
+
+
+
+
8
9
10
+
+
11
12
13
14
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
communities, a detrended correspondence analysis (DCA) was performed. This unconstrained multivariate
technique produces a simultaneous ordination of rows and columns (plots and species) and performs better
than PCA when data have unimodal distributions (McGarigal et al., 2000). Only species occurring in at
least five transects were included in the DCA (see Table 3). At the same time, a PCA was carried
out using a mesohabitat variable matrix. The principal components extracted are hereafter referred to
as PCstretch.
The relationships between descriptor variables of fish communities and macro- and meso-habitat
characteristics were studied through correlation analysis and two-sample tests. Variables departing strongly
from an expected normal distribution were log (base e; continuous variables) or arcsine (percentages)
transformed. However, non-parametric tests were occasionally used when assumptions for parametric
analysis were not met.
RESULTS
Summary of captures
During the surveys, 3982 m of watercourses were electrofished and 182 pairs of fyke nets were set, resulting
in the capture of 6268 fish (Table 1). These belonged to a minimum of 16 species, though some of them were
grouped into families for further analyses (e.g. grey mullets, Mugilidae, including Liza, Chelon and Mugil )
(Table 3).
Eel (Anguilla anguilla) and sandsmelt (Atherina boyeri) were the most widespread species, occupying both
lower and some upper stretches. In fact, eels were detected in all stretches studied, being present in the study
area at altitudes higher than 500 m. Grey mullets were also present in most basins, but were never located in
middle stretches. Other estuarine species were found only in western basins (Table 3).
Among strictly freshwater fish (referred to simply as ‘freshwater fish’ hereafter) chub (Squalius
pyrenaicus) was the most widely distributed species, being present both in western and eastern basins.
Barbel (Barbus sclateri) and loach (Cobitis paludica) were only found in the western (loach) or the eastern
(barbel) sectors. Both Andalusian toothcarp (Aphanius baeticus; referred to simply as ‘toothcarp’ hereafter)
and mosquitofish (Gambusia holbrooki) were located in only one stretch in a single survey (Table 3).
Analysis of river basins
The PCA involving the physiographical descriptors of each basin produced a single component (PC1 basin)
that accounted for more than 72% of the original interbasin variance (eigenvalue: 5.82). The gradient
defined by PC1basin had larger and more sinuous basins towards its positive extreme, with longer and higher
order main channels and more order 1 watercourses. Basins had higher drainage densities and channel
slopes towards the negative extreme of PC1basin. There were significant differences between the
characteristics of basins in the western and eastern sectors of the study area (see Figure 1), as shown by
their PC1basin scores (Mann–Whitney U test; Z=2.2; p50.05). The ordination of basins made by PC1basin
was strongly and positively correlated with their freshwater species (r=0.73; p50.05) and with the species
richness in their middle reaches (r=0.94; p50.001) (Figure 2).
Analysis of river stretches
The presence or absence of nine fish species or families (Table 3) was recorded in 36 stretches/surveys. The
DCA performed produced only one significant axis (axis 1; eigenvalue: 0.51), accounting for 65% of the
distances in the original multidimensional space (Figure 3(a)). Axis 1 clearly discriminated stretches and
surveys dominated by primary freshwater fish (chub, loach and barbel) from those dominated by estuarine
fish. There was a strong positive correlation between axis 1 scores and the number of freshwater fish species
in each stretch and survey (r=0.87; p50.001), whereas the contrary pattern was observed in the case of
estuarine-diadromous species (r=—0.82; p50.001). Axis 2 did not add any explanatory power to the
ordination produced by axis 1 (in fact it diminished it).
The PCAstretch produced two components that accounted for more than 50% of the original variance
(Figure 3(b)). PC1stretch (eigenvalue: 4.79; 34.2% explained variance) could clearly be interpreted as a
N species in
middle stretches
N freshwater
species
3
2
1
0
4
3
2
1
PC1basin
Drainage density
Main channel slope
Ar ea
N order 1 watercourses
Main channel length
Main channel order
Sinuosity
Axis 2
Figure 2. Relationship between the main variation gradient of the basins studied (PC1basin) and the number of primary freshwater and
total fish species found in the middle reaches of each.
Sol Dic
Pom
Bsc
Mug
Spy
Aan
Axis 1
Abo
Cpa
(a)
PC2 stretch
SummerAutumn
Spring
(b)
Upper
stretches
PC1stretch
Lower
stretches
Figure 3. Ordinations produced by: (a) the first two axes of the DCA of fish distribution in the different stretches and surveys; (b) the
first two principal components of the PCA of the environmental characteristics of the stretches studied in the different surveys. As in
Figure 1, black circles denote upper stretches and white circles denote lower stretches. Aan: Anguilla anguilla; Abo: Atherina boyeri;
Bsc: Barbus sclateri; Cpa: Cobitis paludica; Dic: Dicentrarchus spp.; Mug: Mugilidae; Pom: Pomatoschistus spp.; Sol: Soleidae; Spy:
Squalius pyrenaicus.
gradient running from upper to lower stretches (t=5.2; p50.001). It was positively influenced by the width,
depth, conductivity and pH of river stretches and negatively influenced by their substrate coarseness, water
velocity and tree cover. Eastern stretches scored significantly lower PC1stretch than western stretches (t=3.4;
p50.01). PC2stretch (eigenvalue: 2.43; 17.4% explained variance) represented the seasonal change in the
habitat characteristics, being positively correlated with water temperature and negatively correlated with
water velocity, dissolved oxygen and herbaceous cover. PC2stretch scores were significantly different
Axis 1
Freshwater
fish
Estuarine
fish
Species richness
(a)
9
7
5
3
1
(b)
Upper
stretches
PC1stretch
Lower
stretches
Figure 4. Relationship between the main source of variation in the environmental characteristics of the stretches studied (PC1stretch)
and: (a) the main source of variation of fish assemblages (DCA axis 1); (b) fish species richness.
depending on the month when each survey was performed (one-way analysis of variance F=9.75;
p50.001). Post-hoc tests (Tukey HSD) showed that significant differences (p50.05) occurred between
spring (March and May) and summer–autumn (June and October) surveys.
There was a very high concordance between the main gradient of variance of habitat characteristics
(PC1stretch) and fish community composition (axis 1), as shown by the strong correlation of the two
variables (r=—0.86; p50.001) (Figure 4(a)). At the same time, there was a significant increase in the species
richness along the gradient running from upper to lower stretches (r=0.47; p50.01) (Figure 4(b)), though
freshwater species richness showed a clear decrease along this gradient (r=—0.72; p50.001). Total species
richness also showed a negative correlation with PC2stretch (r= —0.31; p= 0.06), though only of marginal
significance, denoting a seasonal reduction in the number of species from spring to summer–autumn.
DISCUSSION
Analysis of river basins
These results show that freshwater fish richness is tightly linked to basin size and associated variables,
which is a commonly observed pattern in different biogeographic areas (Hugueny, 1989; Oberdoff et al.,
1995; Me! rigoux et al., 1998; Clavero et al., 2004). In the small basins studied, differences in richness can be
attributed to variations in extinction risk. Larger drainage areas have a buffer effect on environmental
variation that is characteristic of lotic ecosystems, which is accentuated in Mediterranean areas, promoting
the persistence of fish species (Angermeier and Schlosser, 1989; Taylor and Warren, 2001). In small and
isolated systems, such as those in the study area, the loss of species due to extinction cannot be compensated
by immigration, resulting in species-poor assemblages (Martin-Smith and Laird, 1998).
The differences in the physiographical characteristics of basins in the western and eastern sectors of the
study area could be used in broad outline to explain the distribution patterns of the three most widespread
freshwater species. Loach usually occupies middle or lower river reaches, with low current and sandy or
gravel substrata (Perdices and Doadrio, 1997). These environmental conditions occur rarely in the eastern
sector of the study area, where streams have steeper slopes, and where the characteristic features of lower
reaches rarely occur (Ibarra, 1993). Suitable habitat for loach is only found in western basins within the
study area. Barbel may have a higher extinction risk than other fish species in the area, owing to their larger
body size (Gotelli and Taylor, 1999b). In fact, barbel species have been shown to be more abundant in highorder watercourses within Mediterranean basins (Pires et al., 1999). Barbel inhabited La Jara River at least
during the 19th century (Madoz, 1845–1850) and is known to have become extinct in two streams in the area
(Valle and Guadalmes!ı) in the 1990s (Clavero et al., 2002). It can be assumed that barbel originally occurred
in all basins in the study area, though the species may always have been rare. The species has survived in the
Rivers Miel and P!ıcaro probably because of the higher influence of orogenic fogs in their basins, which
attenuate to some extent the effects of summer droughts (Ojeda et al., 2000). Chub is a ubiquitous species
(Doadrio, 2001) that is often dominant in intermittent and/or small Iberian streams (S. pyrenaicus or
ecologically equivalent congeneric species; Pires et al., 1999; Magalha* es et al., 2002a). The distribution of
this species in the area, occupying basins in western and eastern sectors, fits well with those previous
observations.
Analysis of river stretches
The upstream–downstream river gradient in the composition of fish assemblages has been studied
extensively (e.g. Schlosser, 1982; Moyle and Vonderacek, 1985; Belliard et al., 1997). Features such as
species composition and richness, fish density and dominant fish size or ecological types are known to
change along lotic longitudinal gradients (Angermeier and Karr, 1983; Balon et al., 1986; Schlosser, 1990;
Pires et al., 1999; Filipe et al., 2002; Magalha* es et al., 2002a). These changes have been linked to gradual
variation in water depth, current velocity, substratum and habitat complexity (Gorman and Karr, 1978).
In the study area there were clear longitudinal changes both in habitat features and fish assemblages,
though variation in the latter was caused by the presence of estuarine species, especially grey mullets. Owing
to their small size, these basins have a very poor freshwater fish fauna, usually with one or two species
present in each. In these conditions a longitudinal zonation of freshwater fish assemblages (e.g. Doadrio
et al., 1991; Cowx and Welcomme, 1998) is unlikely to occur, since each species would tend to occupy all
available habitats within the catchment. Thus, only freshwater and estuarine areas can be defined in
relation to fish communities, with a clear increase in species richness from the impoverished upper stretches
to tidally influenced stretches.
Conservation value
Though the basins studied are small, the freshwater fish fauna of the area is important for conservation.
Four freshwater fish species occur in a total drainage area of only 192 km2, which is the same richness as the
adjacent Guadalete River (3360 km2) and Barbate River (1290 km2), and higher than in the Guadiaro River
(1505 km2), which is inhabited by three freshwater fish species (Doadrio, 2001). Moreover, toothcarp, which
is not found in any of those larger basins, is a critically endangered species, with only nine known
populations, some of which have suffered sharp declines (Doadrio et al., 2002; Clavero et al., in press).
According to the IUCN criteria applied to Spain (Doadrio, 2001), some southern chub populations,
including those in the study area, are listed as endangered and loach is listed as vulnerable. In this area, eel
occurs at one of its maximum altitudes in the Iberian Peninsula, owing to the widespread fragmentation of
rivers elsewhere by damming.
The conservation value of the fish fauna is enhanced by the almost complete lack of introduced
species. The establishment and expansion of non-native fish populations is probably the main
threat facing indigenous Iberian fish species (Elvira, 1995; Doadrio, 2001). The presence of alien
species is usually linked to degraded or altered environments, such as those created by river impoundment or channelization (Herbold and Moyle, 1986; Ross, 1991; Corbacho and Sa! nchez, 2001). There are
no such modifications in the basins studied, with the exception of a small dam that is closed only during
summer months, deterring the establishment of alien species. In fact, the only non-native species captured
in the area, mosquitofish, was recorded in a single survey at the end of the dry season. The species was not
found in two subsequent surveys in the same stretch after autumn–winter floods, having apparently
disappeared.
Since unaltered rivers and streams are one of the most scarce and endangered types of aquatic ecosystem
in the Iberian Peninsula, those still remaining should be given high priority for conservation (Clavero et al.,
2004). The recent freshwater fish extinctions recorded in the area (Clavero et al., 2002) strongly justify
control of human impacts in these stream systems. Statutory protection is now well developed in the study
area, which lies almost completely within two Natural Parks and Sites of Community Importance (SCIs)
(Parque Natural Los Alcornocales and Parque Natural del Estrecho). Three additional small SCIs have
been proposed in the area, one of them with the specific aim of protecting the Iberian loach population of
La Jara River (CMA, 2004). However, some of the most important stretches for fish conservation, such as
the one including the Andalusian toothcarp population in La Vega River, are still unprotected and
threatened by tourism and industrial development (Clavero et al., in press). Moreover, territorial protection
may not be a sufficient conservation tool for fish in streams, because water management in Spain is almost
independent from the management of protected areas. In fact, the recent barbel extinctions in the
Guadalmes!ı River occurred within the limits of a Natural Park (Clavero et al., 2002). Effective conservation
action for freshwater fish should, therefore, involve co-ordination between territorial protection and water
management.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We thank L. Barrios, M. Narva! ez, A. Rebollo and J. Valle for their help during the field work. Dr I. J. Winfield and an
anonymous referee made valuable comments that greatly improved the manuscript. The work was supported financially
through the projects ‘Medidas compesatorias de la Autov!ıa a-381 Jerez de la Frontera-Los Barrios’ and ‘Biotic integrity
and environmental factors in watersheds in south-western Spain. Application to the management and conservation of
Mediterranean streams’ (Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnolog!ıa, REN2002-03513/HID).
REFERENCES
Angermeier PL, Karr JR. 1983. Fish communities along environmental gradients in a system of tropical streams.
Environmental Biology of Fishes 9: 117–135.
Angermeier PL, Schlosser IJ. 1989. Species–area relationships for stream fishes. Ecology 70: 1450–1462.
Balon EK, Crawford SS, Lelek A. 1986. Fish communities of the upper Danube River (Germany, Austria) prior to the
new Rhein–Main–Donau connection. Environmental Biology of Fishes 15: 243–271.
Belliard J, Boe. t P, Tales E. 1997. Regional and longitudinal patterns of fish community structure in the Seine river
basin, France. Environmental Biology of Fishes 50: 133–147.
Bravo R, Sorigue MC, Villar N, Hernando JA. 2001. The dynamics of the fish populations in the Palancar stream, a
small tributary of the River Guadalquivir, Spain. Acta Oecologica 22: 9–20.
Clavero M, Rebollo A, Valle J, Blanco-Garrido F, Narva! ez M, Prenda J. 2002. Distribucio! n y conservacio! n de la
ictiofauna continental en pequen* as cuencas costeras del Campo de Gibraltar. Almoraima 27: 335–342.
Clavero M, Blanco-Garrido F, Prenda J. 2004. Fish fauna in Iberian Mediterranean river basins: biodiversity,
introduced species and damming impacts. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 14:575–585.
Clavero M, Blanco-Garrido F, Rebollo A, Prenda J. In press. El salinete (Aphanius baeticus) en el r!ıo de La Vega:
caracterizacio! n de la poblacio! n y factores de amenaza. Almoraima.
CMA. 2004. http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/medioambiente/natura/idxnatura.html.
Corbacho, C, Sa! nchez JM. 2001. Patterns of species richness and introduced species in native freshwater fish faunas of a
Mediterranean-type basin: the Guadiana river (southwest Iberian Peninsula). Regulated Rivers: Research and
Management 17: 699–707.
Cowx IG, Welcomme RL. 1998. Rehabilitation of Rivers for Fish. FAO-Fishing New Books, Blackwell: Oxford.
Doadrio I (ed.). 2001. Atlas y Libro Rojo de los Peces Continentales de Espan*a. Ministerio de Medio Ambiente: Madrid.
Doadrio I, Elvira B, Bernat Y. 1991. Peces Continentales Espan*oles. Inventario y Clasificacio!n de Zonas Fluviales.
ICONA: Madrid.
Doadrio I, Carmona JA, Ferna! ndez-Delgado C. 2002. Morphometric study of the Iberian Aphanius (Actinopterygii,
Cyprinodontiformes), with description of a new species. Folia Zoologica 51: 67–79.
Elvira B. 1995. Native and exotic freshwater fishes in Spanish river basins. Freshwater Biology 33: 103–108.
Filipe AF, Cowx IG, Collares-Pereira MJ. 2002. Spatial modelling of freshwater fish in semi-arid river systems: a tool
for conservation. River Research and Applications 18: 123–136.
Gasith A, Resh VH. 1999. Streams in Mediterranean climate regions } abiotic influences and biotic responses to
predictable seasonal events. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 30: 51–81.
Godinho FN, Ferreira MT, Santos JM. 2000. Variation in fish community composition along an Iberian river basin
from low to high discharge: relative contributions of environmental and temporal variations. Ecology of Freshwater
Fish 9: 22–29.
Gorman OT, Karr JR. 1978. Habitat structure and stream fish communities. Ecology 59: 507–515.
Gotelli NJ, Taylor CM. 1999a. Testing metapopulation models with stream-fish assemblages. Evolutionary Ecology
Research 1: 835–845.
Gotelli NJ, Taylor CM. 1999b. Testing macroecology models with stream-fish assemblages. Evolutionary Ecology
Research 1: 847–858.
Hamdy A, Abu-Zeid M, Lacirignola C. 1995. Water crisis in the Mediterranean: agricultural water demand
management. Water International 20: 176–187.
Herbold B, Moyle PB. 1986. Introduced species and vacant niches. American Naturalist 128: 751–760.
Horton RE. 1945. Erosional development of streams and their drainage basins; hydrophysical approach to quantitative
morphology. Bulletin of the Geological Society of America 56: 275–370.
Hugueny B. 1989. West African rivers as biogeographical islands: species richness of fish communities. Oecologia 79:
235–243.
Ibarra P. 1993. Naturaleza y hombre en el Sur del Campo de Gibraltar: un ana! lisis paisaj!ıstico integrado. Junta de
Andaluc!ıa, CMA, AMA, Sevilla.
Madoz P. 1845–1850. Diccionario Geogra! fico–Estad!ıstico–Histo!rico de Espan*a y sus Posesiones de Ultramar. Madrid.
Magalha* es MF, Batalha DC, Collares-Pereira MJ. 2002a. Gradients in stream fish assemblages across a Mediterranean
landscape: contributions of environmental factors and spatial structure. Freshwater Biology 47: 1015–1031.
Magalha* es MF, Beja PR, Canas C, Collares-Pereira MJ. 2002b. Functional heterogeneity of dry-season fish refugia
across a Mediterranean catchment: the role of habitat and predation. Freshwater Biology 47: 1919–1934.
Martin-Smith KM, Laird LM. 1998. Depauperate freshwater fish communities in Sabah: the role of barriers to
movement and habitat quality. Journal of Fish Biology 53: 331–344.
Matthews WA. 1998. Patterns in Freshwater Fish Ecology. Chapman & Hall: New York.
McDowall RM. 1998. Fighting the flow: downstream–upstream linkages in the ecology of diadromous fish faunas
in west coast New Zealand rivers. Freshwater Biology 40: 111–122.
McGarigal K, Cushman S, Sttaford S. 2000. Multivariate Statistics for Wildlife and Ecology Research. Springer:
New York.
Me! rigoux S, Ponton D, de Me! rona B. 1998. Fish richness and species–habitat relationships in two coastal streams of
French Guiana, South America. Environmental Biology of Fishes 51: 25–39.
Moyle PB, Vonderacek B. 1985. Persistence and structure of the fish assemblage in a small California stream. Ecology
66: 1–13.
Oberdoff T, Guegan J, Hugueny B. 1995. Global scale patterns of species richness in rivers. Ecography 18: 345–352.
Ojeda F, Maran* o! n T, Arroyo J. 2000. Plant diversity in the Aljibe Mountains (S. Spain): a comprehensive account.
Biodiversity and Conservation 9: 1323–1343.
Osborne LL, Wiley MJ. 1992. Influence of tributary spatial position on the structure of warmwater fish communities.
Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 49: 671–681.
Perdices A, Doadrio I. 1997. Threatened fishes of the world: Cobitis paludica (De Buen, 1930) (Cobitidae).
Environmental Biology of Fishes 49: 360.
Pires AM, Cowx IG, Coelho MM. 1999. Seasonal changes in fish community structure of intermittent streams in the
middle reaches of the Guadiana basin. Journal of Fish Biology 54: 235–249.
Poff NL. 1997. Landscape filters and species traits: towards a mechanistic understanding and prediction in stream
ecology. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 16: 391–409.
Prat N, Munne! A. 2000. Water use and quality and stream flow in a Mediterranean stream. Water Research 34:
3876–3881.
Prenda J, Gallardo A. 1996. Self-purification, temporal variability and the macroinvertebrate community in small
lowland Mediterranean streams receiving crude domestic sewage effluents. Archiv fu.r Hydrobiologie 136: 159–170.
Prenda J, Armitage PD, Grayston A. 1996. Habitat use by the fish assemblages of two chalk streams. Journal of Fish
Biology 51: 64–79.
Prenda J, Clavero M, Blanco-Garrido F, Rebollo, A. 2002. Consecuencias ecolo! gicas de la creacio! n de embalses en el
a! mbito mediterra! neo: el caso de los peces. In III Congreso Ibe!rico de Gestio!n y Planificacio!n del Agua, del Moral L
(ed.). Universidad de Sevilla, Universidad Pablo Olavide, Fundacio! n Nueva Cultura del Agua: Sevilla; 497–503.
Rinco! n PA, Velasco JC, Gonza! lez-Sa! nchez N, Pollo C. 1990. Fish assemblages in small streams in western Spain: the
influence of an introduced predator. Archiv fu.r Hydrobiologie 118: 81–91.
Ross ST. 1991. Mechanisms structuring streamfish assemblages: are there lessons from introduced species?.
Environmental Biology of Fishes 30: 359–368.
Schlosser I. 1982. Fish community structure and function along two habitat gradients in a headwater stream. Ecological
Monographs 52: 395–414.
Schlosser I. 1990. Environmental variation, life-history attributes and community structure in stream fishes:
implications for environmental management and assessment. Environmental Management 14: 621–620.
Schumm SA. 1956. The evolution of drainage systems and slopes in badlands at Perth Amboy, New Jersey. Bulletin of
the Geological Society of America 67: 579–646.
Strahler AN. 1964. Quantitative geomorphology of drainage basins and channel networks. In Handbook of Applied
Hydrology, Chow VT (ed.). McGraw-Hill: New York; 4–39.
Taylor CM, Warren Jr ML. 2001. Dynamics in species composition of stream fish assemblages: environmental
variability and nested subsets. Ecology 82: 2320–2330.