EÖTVÖS LORÁND UNIVERSITY

FACULTY OF SCIENCE

DEPARTMENT OF SYSTEMATIC ZOOLOGY AND ECOLOGY

The assessment of pollution effect on

artificial ponds colonization, mainly

amphibians.

Jamila Hajizadastudent of Environmental Science MSc

Dr. Janos FarkasAssistant Professor

ELTE Department of Systematic Zoology and Ecology

Budapest, 2018

IntroductionWetlands and ponds are very important for different kind of species like amphibians,

waterfowl, fish and aquatic invertebrates. Most of time they are considered as “hot spots” of

biodiversity over a landscape or a region (WILLIAMS et al., 2004). But it is bad news that

nowadays due to human activities wetlands and ponds have started to become threatened and

destroyed, which we can include here pollution, industry, agriculture, and urban development

that make them threatened and diverse their flora and fauna by alerting ecological function

significantly (DUGAN, 1990). According to HULL (1997) throughout 20 th century wetland

losses reached 40-90% in a lot of European north-western countries. The reason of this large-

scale habitat loss in wetlands, most of species are endangered as well. We are able to provide

very useful information when we can investigate the distribution and life of amphibians and

aquatic invertebrates in fresh water habitats. Namely,their absence or presence shows us what

is the actual condition of the wetlands and ponds and also gives us insight into the quality of

them. Both of invertebrates and amphibians are very quiet important in the wetlands and

ponds functioning. However, they are the demonstrators of wetlands and ponds health.

The biological assessment by using macroinvertebrates and amphibians as bioindicators is

one of the most cost-effective and reliable assessment tools of wetlands and ponds and also

their habitat quality in streams all over the world (GROWNS et al., 1997).

Nowadays there are a lot of highway construction in Hungary. Along the road many of

smaller or larger artificial pounds, small lakes are created mainly as the reservoir of rain

water. Some of them contain water during the whole year. So, they are perfect habitats a lot

of animals, invertebrates and vertebrates also. But our knowledge about the colonisation of

the artificial small ponds is very poor.

Because of this our aims are the next:

How long time need to colonize a new pond?

What kind of animals colonize the ponds?

What are the diversities and densities of the animals of different ponds?

Are there differences among the different ponds depending of the age of the ponds, or

depending of other water parameters, or the size of the ponds?

Do the amphibian populations indicate the water quality of these artificial ponds?

Is there any role of the artificial ponds of the environmental protection of different species?

2

Thus, to answer these questions and more we choose seven investigation areas in Hungary.

There were five young artificial ponds and two old natural wetlands. Despite the experiment

were done in 2017 years, but with the reason of comparison is the best way to identify the

situation, we also used the data of 2007 years. Namely, that comparison was carried out by

the analysing of taken species’ distribution which of amphibians, small mammals and

invertebrates (water beetles) from investigated areas.

As a result, all changings were came out that what happened during ten years.

3

Literature reviewStatement of ecosystem:

Living (biotic) organisms and their nonliving (abiotic) environment are inseparably

connected and cooperate with each other. Any component that comprises all the organisms

(the biotic community) in a given area networking with the physical environment so that a

current of energy canalized to undoubtedly well-defined biotic structures and cycling of

things between living and nonliving components is an ecological system or ecosystem

There are 21 types of ecosystems that characterize the environment in which humans

entrenched their civilizations (Table 1).

Marine ecosystems Open ocean (pelagic) Continental shelf waters (inshore waters) Upwelling regions (fertile areas with productive fisheries Deep sea (hydrothermal vents) Estuaries (coastal bays, sounds, river mouths, salt marshes

Freshwater ecosystems Lentic (standing water): lakes and ponds Lotic (running water): rivers and streams Wetlands: marshes and swamp forestsTerrestrial ecosystems Tundra: arctic and alpine Boreal coniferous forests Temperate deciduous forests Temperate grassland Tropical grassland and savanna Chaparral: winter rain-summer drought regions Desert: herbaceous and shrub Semi-evergreen tropical forests: pronounced wet and dry seasons Evergreen tropical rain forest

Domesticated ecosystems Agroecosystems Plantation forest and agroforest systems Rural techno ecosystems (transportation corridors, small towns, industries) Urban-industrial techno ecosystems (metropolitan districts)

Table 1. Major ecosystem types of biosphere (Eugene P. Odum, 2005)

4

Marine ecosystem categories depend on marine ecosystem’s construction and function,

Freshwater or aquatic ecosystem types depend on geological and physical structures,

terrestrial ecosystem types based upon vegetation’s natural or native conditions and finally

domestic ecosystem types based on the goods and services which are provided by natural

ecosystems.

The ecosystem types which we are dealing with are freshwater ecosystems. Freshwater

ecosystems may be divided into three groups:

Standing-water or lentic (from lenis, “calm”) ecosystems: lakes and ponds

Running- water or lotic (from lotus, “washed”) ecosystems: springs, streams, and

rivers

Wetlands, where water level fluctuate up and down, often seasonally and also

annually: marshes and swamps.

Lentic habitat is pictured in figure 1. Pond ecosystem consists of five zones: littoral,

limnetic, profundal, compensation depth, and benthic

5

Figure 1. A lentic (pond) ecosystem diagram ((Eugene P. Odum, 2005)

Lentic ecosystems (Lakes and Ponds)

In the geological logic, most basins that nowadays comprise standing freshwater are

comparatively young. The life span of ponds varieties from a few weeks or months for small

seasonal or impermanent ponds to several hundred years for bigger ponds. Although a few

lakes, such as Lake Baikal situated in Russia, are olden, most huge lakes date back to the ice

ages. Standing water ecosystems might be predictable to alteration with time at proportion

more or less contrariwise proportional to their size and depth. Although the geographical

break of freshwater favors speciation, the lack of separation in time does not. Generally, the

species diversity is low in freshwater societies compared with marine or tropical ecosystem-

types.

Characteristically, we are able to differentiate a littoral zone holding rooted vegetation along

the shore, a limnetic zone of open water conquered by plankton, a deep-water profundal

6

zone covering only heterotrophs, and a benthic zone conquered by bottom-dwelling

creatures. The littoral and limnetic zones possess a proportion of P/R>1; the profundal zone

P/R<1; and the compensation depth P/R=1. Life-forms in a pond embrace plankton (free-

floating organisms, such as diatoms), nekton (free-swimming organisms such as fish),

benthos (bottom-dwelling organisms, such as clams), neuston (organisms at the surface film

of water, such as water striders), and periphyton (attached organisms, such as hydras).

By creating artificial ponds and lakes, named impoundments, humans have altered the

landscape in districts that natural bodies of water. Almost every farm now contains at least

one farm pond, and huge impoundments have been created on almost every river in the

United States. Much of this action is advantageous, but the impoundment plan of wrapping

fertile land with a body of water that cannot produce much nourishment may not always be

the best long-standing land usage.

General speaking, ponds especially artificial ponds are uninventoried sources (Casas, J., Toja,

2011) which are still growing and in addition, they have been underestimated in

macroecological studies (Downing et al. 2006). During the last two decades, European pond

ecology and conservation’s researches have increased considerably and it is indicating its

concern to the biodiversity conservation over the landscape level (Boavida 1999; Oertli et al.

2005; Cereghino et al. 2008).

For the assessment of any kind of pollution to aquatic ecosystems, artificial ponds

particularly small ones have the essential value. The ecosystems of artificial ponds should

reflect natural conditions, have a high organism diversity with all trophic levels as in nature,

and the most substantial thing is being manageable experimentally and logistically as well

(Heimbach, 1992).

Wetland

A wetland is defined as any area enclosed by shallow freshwater for minimum portion of the

yearly cycle; therefore, wetland soils are soaked with water repeatedly or for part of the year.

The important issue that specifies the output and species structure of the wetland community

is the hydroperiod- which is, periodicity of water-level variations. Freshwater wetlands are

able thus be categorized as “pulse-stabilized, changeable water level ecosystems”, as are

intertidal marine and estuarine ecosystems.

Wetlands inclined to be very open structure and can be suitably classified due to their

interconnections with deep water, like follows:

7

Riverine wetlands are situated in lowland oxbows and floodplains connected with

rivers. The bottomland hardwood forests on the floodplains of huge rivers are

amongst the most productive of natural ecosystems, like are the freshwater tidal

swamplands lengthways the inferior spreads of large rivers in the Coastal Plains of the

United States.

Lacustrine (from lacus “lake”) wetlands are related with lakes, ponds, or dammed

river channel. They are occasionally deluged when these profounder bodies of water

overflow.

Plaustrine (from palus “marsh”) wetland comprise what are differently named

marshes, bogs, fens, wet prairies, and temporary ponds that happen in collapses not

straight linked with lakes or rivers ( although they might be in ancient riverbeds or

filled ponds or lake basins) (“Fundamentals of Ecology”, Eugene P. Odum, Gary W.

Barrett).

Wetland is created by meeting of water and land. Here includes rivers and lakes, mangroves,

peatlands and marshes, deltas, floodplains and flooded forests, rice-fields and even coral

reefs.

You can come across with wetlands from the polar regions to the tropics, from the high

altitudes to the dry regions and they are in every climate zone and in every country (Internet

1).

Wetlands are called the arteries and veins of the landscape; thus, they cover just a small

percentage of the Earth’s surface but they are essential systems. Wetlands are full of nature

and vital for human life. They are both able to protect our shores and can be a water sources

and purifiers. Wetlands are the greatest stores of natural carbone, and very important to

fisheries and agricultures. If we need to define wetlands with a word: without wetlands world

is without water (Internet 1).

Wetlands as a source:

8

Prosperity

Wetlands are also described as the engine of local economies. There is no any doubt that the

trend of wetland loss, inequity and poverty can be reversed by using them wisely and also by

diversifying livelihood options for communities (Internet 2).

Sufficient clean water

The Water demanding is getting increasing even two times more while population rate is

growing. Moreover, competition between water consumption of human society, agriculture

and energy is also deepening. Of course, water supplies are being able to safeguarded by

improving the strategies of water sharing and wetlands restoring (Internet 2).

Plentiful food

Do you know that wetlands give us plentiful food indirectly? Yes, they do absolutely! If

farmers want to be more productive or to enhance biodiversity and most important make long

term food security assured, it should be better for it to incorporate wetlands in agricultural

landscapes and adjust water and agriculture practises in wetlands (Internet 2).

Protection from disasters

As everybody know, as environmental degradation, not- well planned development and of

9

course climate change is increasing, the impact of natural and made-made disasters is also

intensifying. In this case, 90% of disasters which are related to water can be solved by stop to

damaging to wetlands and by reversing loss of them as well (Internet 2).

Carbon storage

Although only 2 percent of the surface of Earth is occupied by wetlands, it is estimated that

they contain 10 to 14 percent of the carbon (Armentano 1980). Wetland soils, such as the

histosols, can contain up to 20 percent carbon by weight, and of course the peats are even

more carboniferous. Draining of wetlands for conversion to agriculture releases large

quantities of CO2 to the atmosphere, thus contributing to the “CO2 problem”. The aerobic-

anaerobic stratification of wetland sediments (including saltwater marshes) is also important

out of proportion to their area for the part they area for the part they play in the global cycling

of sulfur, nitrogen, and phosphorus as well as carbon. Figure… summarizes key aspects of

microbial decomposition and recycling in wetland and shallow marine sediments.

(“Fundamentals of Ecology”, Eugene P. Odum)

However, carbon emission can be reduced and adaptation capability to climate change can be

enhance by conserving high carbon wetlands (Internet 2).

 

Diverse and beautiful nature

Wetlands are able to provide unique and abundant nature, but unfortunately the biodiversity

of freshwater has become to decline strictly since the 1970’s. However, this trend must be

10

reversed by civil groups, private or government sectors and also by using concerted action by

individuals (Internet 2).

It should be better to be in a concern about wetlands destruction because they are host of

numerous kind of animals’ habitats on the Earth. Most of time wetlands include lots of

animal’s concentration such as mammals, fishes, mammals and invertebrates, and they act

like nurseries for these species. Wetlands bolster up the rice cultivation which is one of the

most important staples in the almost half the world’s population diet. Moreover, they

underpin lots of ecosystem services that give benefits to mankind, for example, flood control,

filtration, recreation, storm protection.

If our planet would not have wetlands, a lot of money have to being spent to treat water for

their citizens, storm surges are able to penetrate even farther inland, floods would be more

devastating for nearby communities, animals would be displaced or die out, and also along

with livelihoods supplies of food would be annihilated. There are lots of organizations, for

example WWF, and governments that put many efforts on conserving and protecting

wetlands through Ramsar Convention almost more than 40 years. It is the only international

treaty that is dedicated to a single ecosystem type. By playing an essential role as a treaty,

currently Ramsar Convention is able to protect more than 476,000 acres of wetlands. It saves

not only wetlands but also their services for the next future generations (Internet 3).

Ramsar Convetion possess over 160 countries as a Contracting Parties and managing wetland

organizes a global challenge over the world that these countries acknowledge the real

meaning of possessing one international treaty devoted to w single ecosystem.

The mission of Convention is “the conservation and using wisely all world’s wetlands by

involving national and local actions and also international cooperation, for contribution to

achieve the sustainable development for current and next world generation”

The Ramsar Convention gives very broad definition to world wetlands. So, here includes all

rivers, all lakes, all ponds even manmade like reservoirs, rice paddies, salt pans; underground

aquifers, mangroves and other coastal areas, swamps and marshes, wet grasslands, coral

reefs, deltas and tidal flats (Internet 4).

“What does maintain species diversity in nature?” This question is one of the most

fundamental question in ecology (Ricklefs RE (1990)). Many ecologists consider that

11

temporal and spatial alteration has an essential roles in diversity maintaining in

environmental disturbance. During the whole history, slopes of environmental productivity

and disturbance have been effective in diversity patters explaining (Paine R; Levin S; Connell

J; Sousa W; Pickett S; Huston MA). Thus, a lot of different patterns were observed between

productivity, disturbance and diversity based upon experimental studies (Huston MA (2014);

Mackey RL, Currie DJ (2001)), and insufficient consistency has caused lots of new question

creation about the advantages of single over-arching hypotheses which predicts natural

communities diversity (Huston MA (2014); Fox JW (2013)).

In this case, more important thing is understanding details of the actual mechanisms which

shape nature diversity patterns than to focus on a single over-arching hypothesis or a pattern.

Huston MA (2014); Miller AD). And also, understanding of productivity and disturbance

poly gradients probably interact species hachures to create diversity patterns which we can

see them in our real world is so critical as well (Huston MA (2014); Haddad NM). That is

extremely important because flooding, invasive species, wildfire, grazing, droughts-

anthropogenic or natural environmental disturbances with the reason of climate change, is

able to change intensity, frequency, timing and duration of the regimes of disturbance to

make understanding of mechanisms of future species communities management and

conservation.

One of the most important concern of amphibians and also other populations, colonizations is

habitat destruction. Further, habitat destruction and also degredation and distirbances have a

decreasing effect on habitat remaining. In this case, habitata protection is the most effective

conservation intervention. In order to protect particular habitats, there are two ways: restoring

habitats and ctreating new habitat patches in many parts of the world (Rebecca K. Smith,

William J. Sutherland). Thus, with the reason of being very important habitat and breeding

recourses for amphibians, artificial ponds are being created(Semlitsch, R. D. (2015)),

The breeding amphibians of pond communities are able to reproduce in a different aquatic

habitats range. Namely, from small road ruts, borrow- pits, even highly ephemeral-desert, and

ditches to seasonal swamps and wetlands, to very stable and permanent marshes, glacial lakes

and farm ponds (Heyer WR; Wilbur HM (1980); Wilbur HM (1990)). Lots of amphibians’

life story, from their breeding migrations, oviposition, and hatching to larval period – all their

morphological features is influenced by regimes of disturbance and it has impact on structure

of community (Wilbur HM (1980); Wilbur HM (1990)).

12

It has been shown that throughout of pond drying’s gradient (or the length of period which

pond possess water= hydroperiod) disturbance is substantial to given an explanation of

presence and reproductive success of species (Werner EE; Semlitsch RD; Skelly DK). The

community structure synthesis through gradients of freshwater like those which used by

amphibians catch out that hydroperiod (for example: physical factor) interacts within species

properties (for example biotic factor) for predicting success of species. Additionally,

synthesis of community structure ensures a comprehension of how disturbance interacts with

species property to identify their survival by that means leading to presumable community

structure (Wellborn GA, Skelly DK, Werner EE (1996). Consequently, investigating a variety

of different pond environments with dissimilar likelihoods of drying in the face of huge

landscape occupied by an amphibian diversity species is able to illuminate the mechanisms

increasing species success, prognosticate the communities structure, and aid to improve

protection and management guidelines for provisioning biodiversity (Drake DL, Ousterhout

BH, Johnson JR, Anderson TL, Peterman WE, Shulse CD, et al. (2015)).

Materials and methodsStudy Areas

The study area was situated next to Lake Balaton in south-western Hungary. The

fieldwork executed in the spring period of 2017, March-May. But the first experiment was

carried out in the same season 2007.

13

The wetlands and artificial ponds that were used as an experiment places were near

highway M7 and highway M8. The distance range in between ponds, wetlands and highways

was fluctuated among 2 and 350 m.

The field study area is called “Nagy Berek” that is situated in the southern part of

Lake Balaton. “Nagy Berek” was a new unit of highway M7 and built in 2006. This area’s

wetlands possess swampy, reedy habitat with different kind of invertebrate and vertebrate

fauna. In addition, during construction of highway M7 new water bodies were also formed,

so two young ponds were chosen from that region.

Another highway M8 is situated in the north- eastern part of Lake Balaton and was

built approximately 13-14 years ago. Three young ponds were taken from that area as a field

study area.

As a result, totally seven study area were predefined for investigation of amphibian:

five young ponds and two old wetlands. Young ponds are manmade that age is less than 15,

but in the contrary wetlands have natural origin, therefore their age is more than 50. The size

of these five ponds and two wetlands was fluctuated between 200-75.000 m2.

Young ponds (age <15)

Young Pond 1: Ordacsehi

This young aged pond is near to the village Ordacsehi and 148 km far from Budapest that is

placed immediately next to highway M7. That M7 highway builds a bridge the water body

and moreover, it was developed while that combining section of highway under the

14

construction during 2005’s summer. This pond possesses 1250 m2 (25m×50m) size with 1.5m

maximum depth and 112 m a.s.l an elevation. In detail, the broadleaved cattail (Typha

latifolia) and sedge (Carex sp.) have occupied the one side of pond and it is 40% with

maximum cover. It is obvious from the figure2. The water chemistry of pond that measured is

given in Table 2.

Young Pond 2: Öszöd

This pond is about 12 years old and situated 200 m far away from highway M7 (km 130

from Budapest) and across from the old wetland Balatonöszöd near the cognominal village.

That new pond possesses 1m a maximum depth, 116 m a.s.l an elevation and its size is 1000

m² (10m x 100m). The pond Öszöd is occupied not totally but partially by broadleaved cattail

(Typha latifolia) and sedge (Carex sp.). It has water without any submerged macrophytes and

algae and as a result it is clear (Figure 3). The water chemistry of pond that measured is given

in Table 2.

All three next young ponds of Csór are located in the north from Lake Balaton, nearby

highway 8 which is also next to the town Székesfehérvár. They are situated 20 m from the

highway 8 and about 100 m from each other.

These three young ponds do not possess natural origin; they are manmade and were

developed throughout the highway 8 construction in 2005. The water level declining during

summer period is visible that is approx. 0.5 m (frequent observed temperature variation is

between 35°C and 40°C).

Young pond 3: Csór Pond 1

Csór pond 1 possess a 1 m maximum depth, 118 m a.s.l an elevation and a size of 600 m² (20

m x 30 m). It is bordered with sedge (Carex sp.) and rush (Juncus sp.), and it also partially

surrounded by bare sand. It has water without any submerged plants and algae and as a result

it is clear but in addition a vegetation covers about 30 % of water surface (Figure 4). The

water chemistry of pond that measured is given in Table 2.

Young Pond 4: Csór Pond 2

15

Csór pond 2 is alike to Csór pond 1. It has a 1m maximum depth, 116 m a.s.l an elevation and

a size of 600 m² (20 m x 30 m).

The Csór pond 2 is bordered partially by sedge (Carex sp.) and rush (Juncus sp.); moreover,

some parts of coastal region of pond are bare sand. It has water without any submerged plants

and algae and as a result it is clear; a vegetation cover is less than 5% (Figure 5). The water

chemistry of pond that measured is given in Table 2.

Young Pond 5: Csór Pond 3

Compare to other Csór ponds above Csór pond 3 is smaller than them. It possesses 80 cm a

maximum depth, 115 m a.s.l. an elevation and 200 m² (10 m x 20 m) a size. There was water

level declining observed throughout summer period as well.

If we compare this pond with other two ponds about surrounding, Csór pond 3 is bordered

entirely with sedge (Carex sp.) and rush (Juncus sp.). Moreover, vegetation cover is 70%, so

the biomass which is present in Csór pond 3 is high by submerged vegetation and filamentous

algae (Figure 6). The water chemistry of pond that measured is given in Table 2.

Wetlands (age > 50 years)

Old wetland 1: Balatonöszöd

This wetland is situated among the freeway E71 and highway M7 throughout Lake Balaton

next to the village Balatonöszöd that size is 71000 m². M7 crossing separates that area into

two parts and in addition it was found in 2006. Wetland of Balatonöszöd possess a natural

origin and it localized in front of Öszöd pond (Young Pond 2).

Wetland of Balatonöszöd has non-flowing water body and vegetation cover is 50%, so it is

surrounded by broadleaved cattail (Typha latifolia) and sedge (Carex sp.). It is noticeable

from the picture that submerged plants such as Ceratophyllum demersum are dominant in that

wetland (Figure 7). The water chemistry of wetland that measured is given in Table 2.

Old wetland 2: Tóköz

16

Wetland of Tóköz is also located among the freeway E71 and highway M7 throughout Lake

Balaton next to the village Zamárdi. The side of highway M7 that surrounds the wetland of

Tóköz was built in 2002. The area which samples were taken from it is 200 m far away from

the highway M7 and possess 1.5 m a maximum depth, 122 m a.s.l. an elevation.

This wetland’s body is also non-flowing and natural. The vegetation cover is 70 % by

broadleaved cattail (Typha latifolia) of the area which sampling carried out. In addition,

Ceratophyllum demersum and Utricularia vulgaris- submerged plants were also existed.

Look at the Figure 8. The water chemistry of wetland that measured is given in Table 2.

NameOrdacseh

i Öszöd Csór 1 Csór 2 Csór 3

Öszöd

marsh Tóköz

No. Young 1 Young 2 Young 3 Young 4 Young 5 Old 1 Old 2

Temperature

13.3-27.8 12.0-27.9

12.7-

26.5

13.5-

25.0 10.5-25.0 10.0-27.0

12.2-

30.7(°C min.-max.)

pH 9.36 8.54 8.27 8.12 7.94 7.53 7.76

Conductivity

1590 1926 2660 2765 530 385 555(µS/cm-¹)

Redoxpotential

-188.75 -157.5 -151.4 -142.6 -131.2 -94.25 -107.2(mV)

NH4 (µg/l) 3.6 34.6 n.a. n.a. n.a. 29.9 109.2

NO3 (mg/l) 0.89 0.44 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1.77 0.89

PO4 (µg/l) 3.6 3.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 14.5 34.3

HCO3 (mg/l) 517.70 481.95 n.a. n.a. n.a. 667.98 535.58

Chl. a (µg/l) 2 2 n.a. n.a. n.a. 7 47

Na (mg/l) 70.62 50.92 n.a. n.a. n.a. 37.70 34.39

K (mg/l) 48.39 28.69 n.a. n.a. n.a. 12.33 17.82

Mg (mg/l) 167.69 194.10 n.a. n.a. n.a. 76.05 78.55

Ca (mg/l) 33.66 60.17 n.a. n.a. n.a. 176.17 54.39

Cl (mg/l) 52.62 271.96 n.a. n.a. n.a. 31.73 24.03

17

Table 2: The water chemistry of study areas.

Name Ordacsehi Öszöd Csór 1 Csór 2 Csór 3 Öszöd

marsh

Tóköz

No. Young 1 Young 2 Young 3 Young 4 Young 5 Old 1 Old 2

Elevation

a.s.l.(m)

112 116 118 116 115 115 122

Area in m2 1250 1000 600 600 200 71000 65000

Distance

from

highway(

m)

0 200 20 20 20 100 200

Shoreline

vegetation

Carex

sp.,Typha

latifolia

Carex

sp.,Typha

latifolia

Carex sp.,

Juncus sp

Carex sp.,

Juncus sp

Carex sp.,

Juncus sp

Carex

sp.,Typ

ha

latifolia

Typha

latifol

ia

Vegetation

in cover %

40 <5 30 5 70 50 70

Surroundi

ng

environme

nt

open Open Open Open Open Part.

Woode

d

open

Age (yr) <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 >50 >50

Origin Construct

ed

Construct

ed

Construct

ed

Construct

ed

Construct

ed

Natural Natur

al

Depth

near bank

(cm)

30 25 20 20 15 30 25

18

Table.3 Description of the environmental parameters of the 5 study sites

19

Figure 2. Young pond Ordacsehi

Figure 3. Young pond Öszöd Figure 4. Young pond Csór1

Figure 5. Young pond Csór2 Figure 6. Young pond Csór3

20

Figure 7. Öszöd marsh

Figure 8. Old wetland Tóköz

21

Sampling methods:

Amphibians’ investigation was carried out with a semi quantitative sampling method. A semi

quantitative sampling method is very efficient method which does not require lots of money

or individual’s effort and moreover comparing data of sampling with another data of

sampling from dissimilar places and at different times is allowed by this sampling method.

Not only adult amphibians but also their tadpoles, and addition small mammals around area

were collected during sampling and collection. These sampling areas that contained five

ponds and two wetlands were surrounded, situated next the shore among macrophytes. The

samples were picked up with a long-handled pond net; the size of mesh equals 0/5 mm. The

process was carried out by intensive swepping during about 15-20l minutes with three sets

and each set was apporiximately 5-6 minutes. All collected animals were kept in 70%

Ethanol and they were specified on species level in the laboratory.

The animal determination was carried out with the accompaniment of Puky Miklos (2005),

Csabai (2000), Csabai (2002), Csabai (2003). In addition, identification of water beetles was

carried out by stereomicroscope.

The important water chemistry characteristics which are redox potential, pH, temperature,

and electric conductivity were measured 1 meter from the bank of ponds and wetlands. The

digital pH (ATC)/mV/Temp meter was used to carried out these measurements. The

chlorophyll and ion content were determined in the laboratory.

Data analysis:

During data analysis both of data of 2007 and 2017 years which related to these species:

amphibians, small mammals and invertebrates such as water beetles were used. Their species

number, diversity was analysed. For carrying out of this CLUSTER statistical analysis

program was used. Statistica7 StatSoft for Windows

Moreover, all graphs, pie charts and some tables were created by using Microsoft Excel

program.

Some information about the CLUSTER statistical analysis:

22

Cluster analysis techniques are mostly used in preliminary studies of community organization

to determine to describe quantitatively specific societies of species along identified

geographic space (Struass, R. E. (1982). This analysis is often accomplished with the

expectation of acknowledging specific locality organizations or reasonable community

groups for future studies. On the other hand, such kind of studies hardly contain an effort to

identify whether any of the alliances determined are statistically substantial in some logic,

that is whether the detected “organizations” may not sensibly be projected on the foundation

of opportunity unaccompanied in the nonexistence of biological interactions (Harper 1978,

Connor and Simberloff 1978, 1979).

As another statistical program and methods, the cluster analysis is used in a different kind of

field such as biology, medicine, business and marketing, computer science, social science and

others (Jackson, D. A., Walker, 2010). There is no any area to give a comprehensive review

of assorted clustering here (you can have a look for example Legendre and Legendre 1998;

Jain et al. 1999; Podani 2000). Thus, it is obliging to reflect a division that splits cluster

analyses into two broad modules: hierarchical and non-hierarchical.

In a simple word, hierarchical analyses direct to dendrograms (or “trees”). The diverging

structure of these trees specifies which matters (e.g., species; sites) are more alike to each

other. But in contrast, non-hierarchical analyses basically assign matters into a clear number

of assemblages such that matters within assemblages are more analogous to each other

comparative to matters between clusters.

23

Result and discussion

As we mentioned before in the introduction, there are two kind of data which of 2007 and

2017 years. In the result part we are going to analyze and interpret the figures, tables, charts

and the consequences of cluster analyses that to determine what did happen about animal

species, especially amphibians and some others during these ten years.

According to the experiment and consequence of data, six species of amphibians, seven

species of small mammals and seven species of water beetles were identified: Table 3.

Amphibians Small mammals Water beetles invertebrates

Triturus dobrogicus Neomys fodiens DytiscidaeBombina bombina Apodemus agrarius HidrophilidaePelobates fuscus Apodemus flavicollis NepidaeBufo bufo Microtus arvalis NotonectidaePseudepidalea viridis Rattus norvegicus CorixidaePelophylax kl. Esculentusesculentus

Mus musculus Gerridae

Arvicola terrestris Hydrometridae

Table 3. Investigated species throughtout ten years ( 2007-2017

In addition, the reason of experimented of tadpoles of amphibians which is more important

for the main purpose, there is also data about it (Table 4 and table 5).

24

species

Ordacse

hi

Öszö

d

Csór

1

Csór

2

Csór

3

Öszöd

marsh Tóköz

Triturus dobrogicus 0 0 0 0 0 3 2

Bombina bombina 5 8 11 7 20 18 35

Pelobates fuscus 0 0 0 0 6 7 4

Bufo bufo 8 11 20 15 18 21 20

Pseudepidalea viridis 10 13 9 8 11 27 32

Pelophylax kl.

Esculentus 8 4 11 9 12 54 72

Table 4. Amphibian tadpole data in 2007 for five ponds and two wetlands (Underlined ones

are wetlands)

Species

Ordacseh

i

Öszö

d

Csór

1

Csór

2

Csór

3

Öszöd

marsh

Tókö

z

Triturus dobrogicus 0 0 0 0 0 4 0

Bombina bombina 9 14 16 20 20 21 40

Pelobates fuscus 3 3 6 3 7 11 10

Bufo bufo 7 11 27 17 20 28 25

Pseudepidalea viridis 9 15 18 21 19 29 35

Pelophylax kl.

Esculentus 11 6 28 16 9 61 85

Table 5. Amphibian tadpole data in 2017 for five ponds and two wetlands (Underlined ones

are wetlands)

Totally, while the number of individuals’ tadpoles of all species was 519 in 2007, it was 684

in 2017.

In detail, the wetlands Öszöd marsh and Tóköz possess the highest amphibian tadpole

abundance which specially Pelophylax kl. Esculentus was dominant in both 2007 and 2017

years (Figure 9 and 10 ). But a fewer increasing was observed in 2017 compare to 2007. In

addition, Bombina bombina was the second most common amphibian species in

25

artificialyoung ponds and natural old wetlands throughout ten years. The Triturus dobrogicus

species tadpole was the only amphibian species tadpole that presented only in old wetlands

with very little number. It was not come across in artificial ponds neither in 2007 nor in 2017

during field experiment. The tadpoles’ distribution of Bombina bombina, Bufo bufo and

Pseudepidalea viridis was almost the same during ten years in artificial ponds and old

wetlands. Compare to 2007, there was a little increase at Pelobates fuscus tadpoles in 2017.

Overall, approximately 24% increasing was observed during 10 years (Figure 9 and 10 ).

Triturus dobrog-icus

Bombina bombina

Pelobates fuscus Bufo bufo Pseudepidalea viridis

Pelophylax kl. Esculentus

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Amphibian species tadpole in 2007

young p. old w.

Num

ber o

f spe

ceis

tadp

oles

Figure 9. Amphibian species tadpole illustration in 2007 in young artificial ponds and old

wetlands.

26

Triturus dobrog-icus

Bombina bombina

Pelobates fuscus Bufo bufo Pseudepidalea viridis

Pelophylax kl. Esculentus

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Amphibian species tadpole in 2017

young p. old w.

Num

ber o

f Spe

cies

tadp

oles

Figure 10. Amphibian species tadpole illustration in 2017 in young artificial ponds and old

wetlands.

Investigation of adult amphibians in study areas showed interesting results: Table 6.

 Amphibian species

Ordacse

hi

Öszö

d

Csór

1

Csór

2

Csór

3

Öszöd

marsh Tóköz

Triturus dobrogicus 1 0 0 0 0 3 2

Bombina bombina 1 1 1 1 2 2 2

Pelobates fuscus 0 0 0 0 2 2 1

Bufo bufo 2 2 2 1 1 2 2

Pseudepidalea viridis 2 2 2 2 3 3 3

Pelophylax kl.

esculentus 2 2 2 2 3 3 3

0

no

present

1 rare

2 common

3 abundant

Legend

27

0 no present

Table 6. Presence rate of amphibian adults in young artificial ponds and old wetlands in

2007

We clasified the amphibian adult presence in the group with marks. Namely, if there was any

amphibian species it was going to the “0” rate; when species were come across rarely we

marked it as “1”, so it means that species was rear for that area; while the rate “2” represented

being common in area, the rate “3” showed abundant species.

Thus, according to the data of 2007, Triturus dobrogicus was found in only Ordacsehi on rare

rate from ponds, but it was abundant and common in wetlands of Öszöd marsh and Tóköz

respectively. While Bombina bombina was rare for four ponds, but it showed common rate in

Csór3 pond and two wetlands. When it comes to Pelobates fuscus it did not present in first

four ponds. It was common in Csór3 pond and Öszöd marsh , but rare in Tóköz. In case of

Bufo bufo , this species was common in first three ponds and in old wetlands,in the contrary it

was rare in Csór2 and Csór3.The last two species that were Pseudepidalea viridis and

Pelophylax kl. Esculentus displayed “2” rate which means common in first four pond, but it

was “3” – abundant in Csór3 pond and in old natural wetlands.

To conclude and show vissualy how was the situation in 2007, here is a pie chart:

Amphibians adults presence-2007

Ordacsehi Öszöd Csór1 Csór2 Csór3 Öszöd marsh Tóköz

28

Figure 11. Amphibian adults presence in young artificial ponds and old wetlands in

2007.

The rate of adult amphibians

As a result, we can say that the wetland of Öszöd marsh had the highest amphibian adults,

second water body was wetlands of Tóköz that amphbians presented the most. If it comes to

young ponds, only pond of Csór3 possess most amphibian adult rate among other ponds after

wetlands.

Next result is 2017year’s data that we are going to look at them to determine how was the

situation. Table7 shows us the presence rate of identified amphibian adults’ rate in

investigation area.

Species

Ordacseh

i

Öszö

d

Csór

1 Csór2

Csór

3

Öszöd

marsh

Tókö

z

Triturus

dobrogicus 0 1 0 0 0 0 3

Bombina

bombina 0 1 2 1 1 2 2

Pelobates

fuscus 3 0 2 1 0 2 2

Bufo bufo 1 1 2 2 1 1 2

Pseudepidalea

viridis 2 2 3 2 2 3 3

Pelophylax kl.

Esculentus 2 2 3 3 2 3 3

0

no

present

1 rare

2 common

3

abundan

t

29

Table 7. Presence rate of amphibian adults in young artificial ponds and old wetlands

in 2017

Due to table, Triturus dobrogicus again presented in only one pond, Öszöd pond. In the

contrary on the data of 2007, it was come across and abundant only Tóköz. The species of

Bombina bombina was found rarely in ponds of Öszöd, Csór2 and Csór3, but it was common

in Csór1 pond and in two old natural wetlands. Ordacsehi pond did not possess any Bombina

bombina. Despite Pelobates fuscus amphibian species did not present in first four ponds in

2007, it changed in 2017. Thus, Ordacsehi pond was abundant and Pelobates fuscus was

common in two old wetlands. It was not found totally in ponds of Öszöd and Csór3. The

amphibian species Bufo bufo displayed the rate “1” and “2” in all ponds and wetlands. It

means it was either rare and common for that places.

Finally, the last two amphibian species adults were again abundant in two old natural

wetlands. Compare two 2007, there was a fewer difference about Pseudepidalea viridis and

Pelophylax kl. Esculentus, so it showed a common and abundant rate in artificial young

ponds.

It would be better to show the situation with pie chart in general: Figure 12

Amphibians adult presence-2017

Ordacsehi Öszöd Csór1 Csór2 Csór3 Öszöd marsh Tóköz

Figure 12. Amphibian adults presence in young artificial ponds and old wetlands in

2017.

30

It is obvious from the pie chart that the wetland of Tóköz possesed the most amphibian adult

presence with more than three forth (3/4). Second is the pond of Öszöd that was less than a

quarter. Compare to 2007 year’s pie chart an enormous increasing occurred in Tóköz wetland

One of the investigated animals were small mammals except amphibians. They were catched

near by these water bodies. In order to compare the circumustance of young articial ponds

and old natural wetlands about small mammals, we are going to give these following pie

charts:

Small mammals presence-2007

Ordacsehi Öszöd Csór1 Csór2 Csór3 Öszöd marsh Tóköz

Figure 13. Small mammal’s presence in five ponds and two wetlands in 2007

31

Small mammals presence-2017

Ordacsehi Öszöd Csór1 Csór2Csór3 Öszöd marsh Tóköz

Figure 14. Small mammal’s presence in five ponds and two wetlands in 2017

It is immediately noticable from the pie charts that there was no any changing in four places

of water bodies’ small mamalls presence during ten years which are pond of Csór1, Csór3

and other two wetlands of Öszöd marsh and Tóköz. The only changing happened in 2017 is

that they became to spread into Csór2 surroundings.

Another and last investigated animals were invertebrates that were water beetles and bugs.

Here are their distribution charts for discussion:

Invertabrate distrubution of 7 water bodies in 2007

Ordacsehi Öszöd Csór1 Csór2 Csór3 Öszöd marsh Tóköz

Figure 15. Invertebrate distribution presence in five ponds and two wetlands in 2007

32

Invertabrate distrubution of 7 water bodies in 2017

Ordacsehi Öszöd Csór1 Csór2 Csór3 Öszöd marsh Tóköz

Figure 16. Invertebrate distribution presence in five ponds and two wetlands in 2017

Firstly, it should be mentioned that the most distributed species among all other animal

species are water beetles. Namely they were spread in every ponds and wetlands in all times.

However, if we check details, we will able to see that while two old natural wetlands

possessed the high distribution of water beetles in compare to wetlands in 2007, but they

shared almost the same amount spreading of beetles with two young ponds which are Csór1

and Csór2 in 2017 that there was an increasing about ponds but decreasing about wetlands. In

addition, there are a small difference between the distributions of other ponds.

Next results are about the CLUSTER statistic analysis. Figure 17, figure 18, figure 19, and

figure 20 represent outcomes of analyses.

It immediately captures attention from the CLUSTER analysis’s result of amphibian

tadpole’s community of two old natural wetlands and young artificial ponds that old wetlands

separate perfectly from young ponds (Figure 17). All Young ponds possess almost the same

similarity. It means that there was no any changing in community of amphibian tadpoles of

young artificial ponds during the last ten years.

Figure 18 displays the changings about amphibian’s adult community distribution in two old

wetlands and five artificial ponds. In detail, only Ordacsehi is different enormously from

both other ponds and wetlands. That pond was very similarly with other ponds and wetlands

ten years ago.

33

Figure 19 shows where the changings did happen about small mammal’s community during

ten years. And it seems form the analysis result that there was no any changing between 2007

and 2017 years. It was because these species habitat placed not in water but around these

water bodies.

Finally, figure 20 is about invertebrate community of five young ponds and two old wetlands.

According to the result, there was too little changing in an old wetlands and young ponds’

water beetles’ community during ten years. Only Csór2 had an increasing trend between

2007-2017 years.

Figure 17. CLUSTER analysis result of amphibian tadpoles’ community of investigated areas

during ten years.

34

Figure 18. CLUSTER analysis result of amphibian adults’ community of investigated areas

during ten years

Figure 19. CLUSTER analysis result of small mammals’ community of investigated areas

during ten years

35

Figure 20. CLUSTER analysis result of water invertabrates’ community of investigated areas

during ten years

36

37