Research Article |
Corresponding author: Luciano Lazzarini Wolff ( luciano_biol@yahoo.com.br ) Academic editor: Paulo Andreas Buckup
© 2017 Luciano Lazzarini Wolff, Norma Segatti Hahn.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Lazzarini Wolff L, Segatti Hahn N (2017) Fish habitat associations along a longitudinal gradient in a preserved coastal Atlantic stream, Brazil. Zoologia 34: 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3897/zoologia.34.12975
|
Habitat conditions at multiple scales are one of the major factors structuring ichthyofauna. Thus, we analyzed the fish habitat associations along the headwater-mouth gradient of a coastal Atlantic stream. We categorized the sampling sites into habitat units, so that in the middle reach these categories were statistically differentiated into riffles, runs and pools. Samplings were carried out quarterly from May 2009 to February 2010 using electrofishing. Principal component analysis (PCA) indicated an environmental gradient from higher water velocity and rocky bottom to deeper and sandy areas in the headwater-mouth direction. A total of 1,495 individuals belonging to 27 species were captured, being 13, 18 and 22 from headwater, middle and mouth reaches, respectively. Shannon diversity was slightly higher in the middle reach, while beta diversity showed higher rates of addition than turnover in species along the longitudinal gradient. Fish structure, evaluated by DCA (detrended correspondence analysis) scores, showed significant differences between upper reaches and mouth reach, but the middle riffles did not differ from headwater habitats. In the middle reach, mesohabitat analysis distinguished riffles, with higher abundance of fast-water crenuchids, from pools, with a higher abundance of lentic-water characids. These results suggest that environmental differences along the stream determine the wider structural patterns. However, the middle reach amassed species from upper areas and lowlands in structured fish mesohabitat associations, possibly implying distinct local ecological interactions. These findings contribute to the assessment of stream conservation status and to recognize eventual direct impacts on fish structures along longitudinal gradients.
Abiotic gradient, diversity, ichthyofauna, mesohabitat, multiple scales
A major challenge in ecology of freshwater environments is understanding the functioning of river systems and identifying the mechanisms that underlie the structure of communities (
Longitudinal changes in the structure and richness of ichthyofauna have been widely recorded both in temperate (
However, longitudinal changes in composition and richness of fish species need a detailed assessment because their structural differences may also occur at reduced spatial scales (
Recently, efforts have been made to detect differences in functional and taxonomic diversity (
Atlantic forest is one of the world’s hotspots for biodiversity conservation and, despite its threatened fauna and flora (
Upper courses of coastal Atlantic streams from southern and southeast Brazil are widely located in preserved and topographically irregular areas of Serra do Mar mountains (
The study was carried out in the Vermelho River, eastern Atlantic basin, Brazil (Fig.
Samples of fish and abiotic variables were all taken in third-order stream reaches of headwater, middle and mouth of Vermelho River with approximately 50 m long each (Fig.
Each reach was subdivided into different sampling sites according to their hydrological and structural characteristics. These sampling sites were provisionally classified in mesohabitats along the headwater-mouth direction in the following order: pool, riffles, riffles and run (headwater reach); pool, run, riffles, run, riffles and pool (middle reach) and pool, riffles and run (mouth reach). However, the sampling sites classification in mesohabitats was only validated in middle reach (Fig.
Fish sampling procedure. Length (above) and average depth (below) of each blocked (with seines) sampling site are showed. Middle sites were clustered into mesohabitats (see text). Displacement of fishing indicates the upstream direction of passage of electrofishing dip nets with electrodes.
Fish were collected by electrofishing using a TOYAMA® power generator (127 volts AC and 5 A) from May 2009 to February 2010. As fish species are able to move among habitats and migrate short distances seasonally (
Water temperature (°C), dissolved oxygen (mg.l−1), pH and electrical conductivity (µS.cm-1) were measured at each sampling site where fish were captured and determined as the arithmetic mean of four observations during the year. For hydraulic variables, the total length of each sampling site was measured and then three equidistant transversal sections along the site were marked. Channel width (m) was measured along each of these transversal sections, being determined as the arithmetic mean of three observations. Mean depth (cm) was estimated through five equidistant measurements along each transversal section and then determined as the arithmetic mean of 15 observations for each site. Similarly, water velocity (m.s−1), measured with a General Oceanics® mechanical flowmeter was determined from the arithmetic mean of three observations taken at the center of each transversal section at each site. The substrate bottom composition was categorized into different size classes and quantified by visual inspection. A total percentage of 100% was established for the sum of all substrate size categories at each sampling site. Size classes were based on
We applied a principal component analysis (PCA) to the Pearson correlation matrix of environmental variables to describe the patterns of environmental variability among headwater, middle and mouth reaches. The variables were log (x+1) transformed in order to linearize the correlations. The Broken-Stick model was used for retention and interpretation of the axes, in which only axes with eigenvalues greater than those randomly generated are interpreted (
To assess the volume of each sampling site, we used the following formula: Volumesite = Length site * Mean depth site * Mean channel width site. Furthermore, in order to convert fish abundance data into density (i.e., individuals.m-3), we divided the number of individuals of each species by the respective sampling site volume. From these data, longitudinal and local patterns of ichthyofauna were described by a detrended correspondence analysis (DCA), combining the densities of each sampling site among the stream reaches. Fish densities were log (x+1) transformed to linearize the relationships. In this analysis, only axes with eigenvalues > 0.20 were retained and interpreted (
Most of the variations in environmental parameters were related to water velocity, which decreased along the stream, and to the average depth and channel width, which increased (Table
Mean ± standard deviation of abiotic variables and main substrate bottom for sampling sites in headwater, middle and mouth reaches of the Vermelho River, Paraná state, Brazil. Temp. = temperature, DO = dissolved oxygen, Cond. = conductivity. Deviations represent environmental variation between May 2009 and February 2010. * Sites at middle reach were classified as riffles, runs and pools.
Sites | Water vel. (m.s-1) | Depth (cm) | Channel width (m) | Temp. (°C) | DO (mg.l-1) | pH | Cond. (µS/cm-1) | Boulders (%) | |
Headwater | Site 1 | 7.0 ± 2.1 | 10.6 ± 2.9 | 3.1 ± 0.9 | 20.0 ± 2.4 | 7.7 ± 1.2 | 7.0 ± 0.4 | 45.1 ± 4.9 | 55 ± 8.7 |
Site 2 | 4.4 ± 2.2 | 21.8 ± 4.8 | 4.1 ± 1.0 | 20.1 ± 2.5 | 7.8 ± 0.9 | 7.2 ± 0.4 | 41.6 ± 2.6 | 36,3 ± 6.5 | |
Site 3 | 6.6 ± 1.8 | 14 ± 5.9 | 2.9 ± 1.0 | 20.1 ± 2.3 | 7.4 ± 1.4 | 7.3 ± 0.3 | 42.1 ± 2.3 | 37,5 ± 8.3 | |
Site 4 | 5.5 ± 1.8 | 23.4 ± 8.3 | 2.6 ± 1.0 | 20.1 ± 2.3 | 7.9 ± 1.5 | 7.4 ± 0.3 | 41.8 ± 1.2 | 75 ± 5 | |
Middle* | Pool1 | 1.7 ± 1.8 | 28.1 ± 5.1 | 2.7 ± 0.4 | 20.6 ± 2.4 | 8.0 ± 0.7 | 6.5 ± 0.5 | 40.7 ± 1.6 | 1.3 ± 2.2 |
Riffles1 | 6.4 ± 1.8 | 8.2 ± 2.2 | 2.6 ± 0.3 | 20.5 ± 2.3 | 7.8 ± 0.5 | 7.0 ± 0.6 | 39.3 ± 4.2 | 1.3 ± 2.2 | |
Runs1 | 2.0 ± 1.5 | 21.5 ± 8.2 | 2.8 ± 0.4 | 20.6 ± 2.2 | 7.1 ± 0.4 | 7.1 ± 0.4 | 39.4 ± 4.0 | 0 ± 0 | |
Riffles2 | 6.5 ± 3.1 | 12.0 ± 5.2 | 2.0 ± 0.8 | 20.7 ± 2.4 | 7.5 ± 0.7 | 7.2 ± 0.3 | 39.4 ± 4.8 | 0 ± 0 | |
Runs2 | 1.2 ± 1.5 | 21.6 ± 4.7 | 3.7 ± 0.2 | 20.6 ± 2.3 | 7.3 ± 0.7 | 7.2 ± 0.4 | 39.3 ± 4.3 | 0 ± 0 | |
Pool2 | 0.7 ± 0.6 | 31.9 ± 6.4 | 3.5 ± 0.3 | 20.7 ± 2.3 | 7.6 ± 1.0 | 7.2 ± 0.4 | 39.3 ± 4.4 | 0 ± 0 | |
Mouth | Site 1 | 2.1 ± 1.0 | 35.2 ± 20.0 | 3.9 ± 0.8 | 20.4 ± 3.3 | 7.5 ± 1.1 | 6.1 ± 0.2 | 38.8 ± 4.4 | 0 ± 0 |
Site 2 | 4.2 ± 1.4 | 26.4 ± 22.7 | 4.2 ± 1.0 | 20.5 ± 3.3 | 7.3 ± 1.0 | 6.7 ± 0.6 | 36.6 ± 5.2 | 0 ± 0 | |
Site 3 | 1.4 ± 1.5 | 45.9 ± 29.7 | 5.4 ± 1.1 | 20.5 ± 3.3 | 7.6 ± 0.9 | 6.7 ± 0.5 | 39.9 ± 1.7 | 0 ± 0 | |
Sites | Boulders (%) | Cobbles (%) | Pebbles (%) | Gravel (%) | Sand (%) | Sand/Clay (%) | Trunk/branch (%) | Leaf litter (%) | |
Headwater | Site 1 | 55 ± 8.7 | 30 ± 0 | 8.8 ± 4.1 | 6.3 ± 5.4 | 0 ± 0 | 0 ± 0 | 0 ± 0 | 0 ± 0 |
Site 2 | 36,3 ± 6.5 | 35 ± 6.1 | 15 ± 5 | 13.8 ± 8.1 | 0 ± 0 | 0 ± 0 | 0 ± 0 | 0 ± 0 | |
Site 3 | 37,5 ± 8.3 | 33.8 ± 10.8 | 6.3 ± 2.1 | 22.5 ± 14.4 | 0 ± 0 | 0 ± 0 | 0 ± 0 | 0 ± 0 | |
Site 4 | 75 ± 5 | 17.5 ± 4.3 | 1.3 ± 2.1 | 6.3 ± 5.4 | 0 ± 0 | 0 ± 0 | 0 ± 0 | 0 ± 0 | |
Middle* | Pool1 | 1.3 ± 2.2 | 3.8 ± 2.2 | 3.8 ± 2.2 | 57.5 ± 17.9 | 2.5 ± 4.3 | 23.8 ± 12.9 | 0 ± 0 | 7.5 ± 13 |
Riffles1 | 1.3 ± 2.2 | 26.3 ± 13.9 | 67.5 ± 10.9 | 2.5 ± 2.5 | 0 ± 0 | 0 ± 0 | 0 ± 0 | 2.5 ± 2.5 | |
Runs1 | 0 ± 0 | 28.8 ± 11.3 | 35 ± 5 | 23.8 ± 9.6 | 0 ± 0 | 2.5 ± 4.3 | 5 ± 3.5 | 5 ± 3.5 | |
Riffles2 | 0 ± 0 | 72.5 ± 4.3 | 18.8 ± 4.1 | 1.3 ± 2.2 | 0 ± 0 | 0 ± 0 | 0 ± 0 | 7.5 ± 5.6 | |
Runs2 | 0 ± 0 | 27.5 ± 8.3 | 12.5 ± 4.3 | 46.3 ± 4.1 | 1.3 ± 2.2 | 0 ± 0 | 5 ± 6.1 | 7.5 ± 5.6 | |
Pool2 | 0 ± 0 | 16.3 ± 8.2 | 8.8 ± 2.2 | 57.5 ± 4.3 | 0 ± 0 | 0 ± 0 | 6.3 ± 4.1 | 11.3 ± 7.4 | |
Mouth | Site 1 | 0 ± 0 | 0 ± 0 | 0 ± 0 | 2.5 ± 4.3 | 28.8 ± 18.2 | 31.3 ± 20.1 | 17.5 ± 2.5 | 20 ± 6.1 |
Site 2 | 0 ± 0 | 0 ± 0 | 15 ± 15 | 35 ± 8.7 | 12.5 ± 8.3 | 2.5 ± 4.3 | 28.5 ± 7.4 | 6.3 ± 4.1 | |
Site 3 | 0 ± 0 | 0 ± 0 | 13,8 ± 6.5 | 5 ± 0 | 1.3 ± 2.1 | 26.3 ± 6.5 | 25 ± 3.5 | 28.8 ± 5.4 |
The first PCA axis retained for interpretation (eigenvalue = 5.2) explained 35% of total variance and primarily distinguished the reaches (Fig.
The discriminant analysis distinguished the groups of riffle, pool and run mesohabitats predefined according to hydraulics and structural characteristics from middle reach (Wilks’ lambda = 0.0017, F = 10.96, p < 0.001). Average depth and cobble substrate percentage were the variables that significantly influenced the separation of groups (Table
Results of discriminant analysis with environmental variables that contributed to separation of groups of mesohabitats (i.e., riffles, pools and runs) in the middle reach of the Vermelho River. Bold values are significant (p<0.05).
Axis 1 | Axis 2 | Wilks’ Lambda | Partial Lambda | F | p | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Depth | -2.187 | -0.059 | 0.0052 | 0.321 | 7.39 | 0.019 |
Water velocity | -0.369 | -0.240 | 0.0017 | 0.983 | 0.06 | 0.942 |
Cobbles | 1.647 | 2.591 | 0.0053 | 0.314 | 7.65 | 0.017 |
Pebbles | 0.417 | 1.142 | 0.0028 | 0.593 | 2.40 | 0.161 |
Leaf litter | -0.144 | -2.953 | 0.0032 | 0.526 | 3.15 | 0.106 |
Sand | 1.604 | 0.828 | 0.0035 | 0.474 | 3.88 | 0.074 |
Gravel | -0.220 | 1.042 | 0.0028 | 0.597 | 2.36 | 0.165 |
Sand/clay | -0.384 | 1.619 | 0.0023 | 0.730 | 1.29 | 0.333 |
pH | 1.577 | 1.277 | 0.0034 | 0.488 | 3.67 | 0.081 |
Dissolved oxygen | 0.119 | -1.352 | 0.0025 | 0.673 | 1.70 | 0.251 |
Trunks/branches | -1.192 | -0.646 | 0.0028 | 0.598 | 2.36 | 0.165 |
Temperature | -1.506 | 0.622 | 0.0027 | 0.622 | 2.13 | 0.190 |
Conductivity | -2.440 | 2.088 | 0.0028 | 0.595 | 2.38 | 0.163 |
Boulders | 0.725 | -0.355 | 0.0022 | 0.761 | 1.10 | 0.385 |
Channel width | -1.410 | 0.520 | 0.0022 | 0.772 | 1.03 | 0.405 |
Eigenvalues | 89.2 | 5.6 | ||||
% | 94 | 100 |
A total of 1,495 fish individuals were captured, belonging to 27 species, 12 families and six orders. Siluriformes contributed with 14 (51.9%), Characiformes with seven (25.9%), and the other orders had only one or two species (Table
Number of individuals per fish species collected and ichthyofauna descriptors in headwater, middle and mouth reaches in the Vermelho River, Paraná state, Brazil. In bold, predominant species.
Species | Voucher specimens | Headwater | Middle | Mouth |
---|---|---|---|---|
Characiformes | ||||
Characidae | ||||
Deuterodon langei Travassos, 1957 | NUP9541 | 105 | 155 | 33 |
Hollandichthys multifasciatus (Eigenmann & Norris, 1900) | NUP9529 | 4 | 36 | 13 |
Mimagoniates microlepis (Steindachner, 1876) | NUP9526 | 10 | 73 | 202 |
Astyanax aff. ribeirae Eigenmann, 1911 | NUP9742 | – | 2 | 1 |
Crenuchidae | ||||
Characidium lanei Travassos, 1967 | NUP9525 | 117 | 111 | 38 |
Characidium pterostictum Gomes, 1947 | NUP9588 | 29 | 22 | 30 |
Erythrynidae | ||||
Hoplias malabaricus (Bloch, 1794) | NUP19193 | – | – | 1 |
Cyprinodontiformes | ||||
Poeciliidae | ||||
Phalloceros harpagos Lucinda, 2008 | NUP9527 | – | 27 | 6 |
Rivulidae | ||||
Rivulus luelingi Seegers, 1984 | NUP19198 | – | 1 | – |
Gymnotiformes | ||||
Gymnotidae | ||||
Gymnotus pantherinus (Steindachner, 1908) | – | – | 4 | 1 |
Gymnotus carapo Linnaeus, 1758 | NUP19194 | – | – | 1 |
Perciformes | ||||
Gobiidae | ||||
Awaous tajasica (Lichtenstein, 1822) | NUP19195 | – | – | 4 |
Siluriformes | ||||
Callichthydae | ||||
Scleromystax barbatus (Quoy & Gaimard, 1824) | NUP9570 | – | 16 | 21 |
Loricariidae | ||||
Ancistrus multispinnis (Regan, 1912) | NUP13626 | 12 | 9 | – |
Schizolecis guntheri (Miranda Ribeiro, 1918) | NUP9465 | 7 | 70 | 5 |
Schizolecis sp. 1 | NUP10903 | – | – | 32 |
Schizolecis sp. 2 | NUP10904 | 8 | 41 | – |
Hisonotus leucofrenatus (Miranda Ribeiro, 1908) | – | – | – | 3 |
Kronichthys cf. lacerta (Nichols, 1919) | NUP10900 | – | – | 11 |
Pseudotothyris obtusa (Miranda Ribeiro, 1911) | NUP10902 | – | – | 59 |
Rineloricaria sp. | NUP10898 | – | 12 | 12 |
Heptapteridae | ||||
Acentronichthys leptos Eigenmann & Eigenmann, 1889 | NUP9592 | 19 | 17 | 2 |
Rhamdioglanis frenatus Ihering, 1907 | NUP13614 | 32 | 9 | – |
Pimelodella pappenheimi Ahl, 1925 | NUP13613 | – | – | 6 |
Rhamdia quelen (Quoy & Gaimard, 1824) | NUP9524 | 4 | 35 | 4 |
Trichomycteridae | ||||
Ituglanis proops (Miranda Ribeiro, 1908) | NUP19197 | 2 | – | – |
Synbranchiformes | ||||
Synbranchidae | ||||
Synbranchus marmoratus Bloch, 1795 | NUP9567 | 4 | 5 | 12 |
Richness | 13 | 18 | 22 | |
Abundance | 353 | 645 | 497 | |
Shannon diversity | 1.87 | 2.35 | 2.17 | |
Evenness | 0.73 | 0.81 | 0.70 |
Fish species richness increased along the stream, with 13, 18 and 22 species in headwater, middle and mouth reaches, respectively (Table
In the headwater reach, C. lanei, D. langei and Rhamdioglanis frenatus Ihering, 1907 were the most abundant, while Ituglanis proops (Miranda Ribeiro, 1908) was rare and exclusive. In the middle reach, in addition to C. lanei and D. langei, M. microlepis also predominated. Rivulus luelingi Seegers, 1984, with only one individual, was exclusive. At the mouth reach, abundances were higher for M. microlepis, Pseudotothyris obtusa (Miranda Ribeiro, 1911) and C. lanei, while Astyanax aff. ribeirae Eigenmann, 1911, Hoplias malabaricus (Bloch, 1794) and Gymnotus spp. had only one individual each (Table
Shannon diversity and evenness had their highest absolute values in the middle reach (Table
The first DCA axis retained for interpretation (λ1 = 0.50) classified the ichthyofauna structure into headwater, middle and mouth reaches and explained 21.3% of total variance (Fig.
In the middle reach, fish richness and abundance were higher in pools and runs (Table
Number of individuals per fish species collected and richness in riffle, pool and run mesohabitats of middle reach in the Vermelho River, Paraná state, Brazil. In bold, predominant species.
Species | Riffles | Pools | Runs |
Characiformes | |||
Deuterodon langei Travassos, 1957 | 7 | 103 | 45 |
Hollandichthys multifasciatus (Eigenmann & Norris, 1900) | 1 | 27 | 8 |
Mimagoniates microlepis (Steindachner, 1876) | 1 | 62 | 10 |
Astyanax aff. ribeirae Eigenmann, 1911 | – | 2 | – |
Characidium lanei Travassos, 1967 | 64 | 17 | 30 |
Characidium pterostictum Gomes, 1947 | 12 | 2 | 8 |
Cyprinodontiformes | |||
Phalloceros harpagos Lucinda, 2008 | – | 22 | 5 |
Rivulus luelingi Seegers, 1984 | 1 | – | – |
Gymnotiformes | |||
Gymnotus pantherinus (Steindachner, 1908) | – | 1 | 3 |
Siluriformes | |||
Scleromystax barbatus (Quoy & Gaimard, 1824) | – | 11 | 5 |
Ancistrus multispinnis (Regan, 1912) | 5 | 1 | 3 |
Schizolecis guntheri (Miranda Ribeiro, 1918) | 25 | 18 | 27 |
Schizolecis sp. 2 | 10 | 16 | 15 |
Rineloricaria sp. | 1 | 5 | 6 |
Acentronichthys leptos Eigenmann & Eigenmann, 1889 | 13 | – | 4 |
Rhamdioglanis frenatus Ihering, 1907 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
Rhamdia quelen (Quoy & Gaimard, 1824) | – | 30 | 5 |
Synbranchiformes | |||
Synbranchus marmoratus Bloch, 1795 | – | 4 | 1 |
Richness | 12 | 16 | 16 |
Abundance | 143 | 324 | 178 |
Based on the literature, between 20 and 50 fish species are estimated to occur in coastal Atlantic streams of Paraná state (
We also registered three species that are probably new. Rineloricaria sp. corresponds to Rineloricaria sp. 1 from
The richness and species rarefaction increased in headwater-mouth direction, while Shannon diversity was higher in the middle reach. Similar results were reported by
The Vermelho River had higher rates of species addition than replacement along its course, corroborating results of
The DCA and statistical tests showed that fish community structure differed only between upper and mouth reaches. Fast-water sites from headwater reach did not differ from middle riffles because these sites share similar composition and density of fish. On the other hand, the middle pool ichthyofauna was more similar to lentic habitats of the mouth reach. According to
Similarly,
Analyzing only longitudinal scale, similar patterns in fish distribution among river segments were identified by Ferreira and Petrere Jr (
Focusing only on the mesohabitat scale, several authors recognize that within fish community, some species preferably inhabit riffles or runs while others inhabit pools (
On the other hand, pools have been considered as mesohabitats with the highest habitat availabilities and environmental complexity, which may support a greater number of species (
Different from riffles and pools, totally segregated from one another, fish community structure of runs was slightly similar in composition with other mesohabitats. However, runs harbor a high number of lentic species such as D. langei, M. microlepis and H. multifasciatus in relation to riffles, and an intermediate abundance of fast-water fish, such as Characidium spp. Similar to our study, where the ichthyofauna was not completely distinct in composition, but mainly in proportional abundance, Rezende et al. (
In short, our results showed differences in composition and structure of ichthyofauna in the Vermelho River, related both to reach and mesohabitat scales. These results reveal differences in distribution, abundance and ecological requirements of species and suggest that environmental differences along stream determine the wider structural patterns of ichthyofauna. However, combining reach and habitat spatial scales, some patterns in fish similarities showed that the middle reach is a transitional heterogeneous area that congregates species from the headwater and mouth reaches, but is locally structured in fish-mesohabitat associations. Additionally, these local patterns revealed distinct fish structures between riffles and pools, which likely imply distinct local ecological interactions. Our findings reflect the preserved conservation status of the Vermelho River, contributing to identifying possible direct impacts on fish fauna along longitudinal gradients in other Atlantic coastal streams.
Authors are grateful to Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) for the doctoral scholarship (process 140357/2008-4) and to Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Supeior (CAPES) for the sandwich doctoral scholarship (process 6675/10-7) granted to the first author, to Nupélia and PEA for providing the infrastructure, and to SPVS (Sociedade de Pesquisa em Vida Selvagem e Educação Ambiental – Society for Wildlife Research and Environmental Education) for permission and support to conduct the study in Reserve Morro da Mina. We are also grateful to our colleagues Thiago Ewerton Vecchi, Dilermando P. Lima Jr, Carlos A. Miranda, Rafaela P. Ota, Natalia Carniatto, Isadora L. Camargo, Celso P. Santos and Cristiano M. Pereira for helping in samplings, to Javier Lobón-Cerviá for suggestions, to researchers of Museu de História Natural Capão da Imbuia and of Museu de Peixes do NUPELIA and to Paulo A. Buckup for species identification and to Gustavo H. Zaia Alves by the language revision.
Figure S1. Hydrological and structural characteristics of the sampling reaches of the Vermelho River, state of Paraná, Brazil
Data type: specimens data
Explanation note: (A) Cascaded channel in the headwater; (B, C and D) riffles, pool and runs mesohabitats, respectively, in the middle; (E-F) slow-moving waters habitats in the mouth.