scholarly journals eDNA metabarcoding survey of fish communities in the Danube and its tributaries

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Didier Pont ◽  
Paul Meulenbroek ◽  
Vinzenz Bammer ◽  
Tony Dejean ◽  
Tibor Eros ◽  
...  

In complement to the JDS4 traditional fish survey (TFS, mainly by electrofishing), a fish eDNA metabarcoding-based survey has been implemented within the framework of the monitoring program organized by DNAqua-Net and in collaboration with the INTERREG "MEASURES" program. Water samples were collected at 29 sites from the source to the mouth of the Danube River, and at 18 tributaries. Two water samples (mean volume 29 L per sample) were collected at each site and the water filtered in situ. Twelve PCR replicates were performed per sample using teleo primers. In total, 80 taxa were detected, of which 19 corresponded mainly to farmed fish or food fish due to eDNA release in waste waters, most often downstream of large cities. Of the remaining 61 taxa, 50 taxa were identified at the species level, six taxa at the genus level, and five taxa at a higher taxonomic level. Concerning the Danube river itself, 69 and 57 species/markers were detected along the Danube River by TFS and eDNA surveys, respectively. 50 of these taxa were detected by both methods. Nine species were captured by TFS alone, mainly due to gaps in reference librairies and too colosely related barcodes. Eight species were only detected by eDNA. Except for the Salvelinus group, these were all benthic species, which are difficult to catch by electrofishing in large rivers (Acipenser ruthenus, Acipenser stellatus, Benthophilus sp., Romanogobio uranoscopus, Sabanejewia balcanica, Umbra krameri). The species richness tended to increase from upstream to downstream and the relative number of DNA sequences per taxa showed a clear succession of species along the river. Barbatula barbatula, Cottus gobio, Hucho hucho, Lampletra planeri, Phoxinus phoxinus and Thymallus thymallus were restricted to the Upper Danube whereas A. ruthenus, Neogobius fluviatilis, S. balcanica and Scardinius erythrophtalmus were detected from Vienna to the Danube river mouth. Abramis brama, Alburnus alburnus, Cyprinus carpio, Silurus glanis, Sander spp, Zingel streber were detected all along the river course; Alosa spp. and Syngnathus abaster downstream from the Iron Gate; A. stellatus and U. krameri only on the most downstream site (Danube delta). The calculation of a fish index, based on the common metrics used to intercalibrate national fish assessment methods on a European scale, classified most of the sites as being in moderate ecological status. Comparison of the indicative ecological status calculated using the same assessment method based on TSF and eDNA data at the common Danube sites showed a similar classification for six of the 13 sites and a difference of one class for the remaining seven sites.


2015 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 253-260
Author(s):  
Красимира [Krasimira] Колева [Koleva]

The Bulgarian-Romanian language boundary: anthroponymical dataThe topic is Balkan anthroponymy. The area is the Lower Danube – the Bulgarian-Romanian language boundary. In this contact zone there is a distribution of family names, formed from urbonyms. They signal a specific regional belonging, and they show the link with the common area: the Danube river. We are referring to family names of the type: Vidinliev, Kalafatov, Beketov, Svishtovliev, Ruschukliev, Kalarashev, Tutrakanov, (meaning ‘from Vidin’, ‘from Calafat’, ‘from Bechet’, ‘from Svishtov’, ‘from Ruse’, ‘from Calarashi’, ‘from Tutrakan’). This phenomenon is widespread on both banks of the river. Bułgarsko-rumuńska granica językowa. Dane antroponimiczneArtykuł dotyczy bałkańskiej antroponimii w regionie dolnego Dunaju, stanowiącego bułgarsko-rumuńską granicę i jednocześnie strefę kontaktu. W tym regionie częste są nazwiska derywowane od nazw miejscowości. Sygnalizują one pochodzenie, wskazując jednocześnie na rodowód miejscowy, tj. z regionu naddunajskiego. Są to nazwiska takie jak: Vidinliev, Kalafatov, Beketov, Svištovliev, Rusčukliev, Kalarašev, Tutrakanov (oznaczające: 'z Vidinu, z Kalafatu, z Svištova, z Ruse, z Kalaraši, z Tutrakanu'). Zjawisko to występuje po obu stronach Dunaju.



2004 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 235-246 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. A. Levashova ◽  
V. N. Mikhailov ◽  
M. V. Mikhailova ◽  
V. N. Morozov


2016 ◽  
Vol 53 ◽  
pp. 48-49
Author(s):  
M. Spinu ◽  
M. Niculae ◽  
G.F. Brudasca ◽  
C.D. Sandru ◽  
E. Pall


2017 ◽  
Vol 68 (8) ◽  
pp. 1716-1722 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vasile Ion Iancu ◽  
Toma Galaon ◽  
Marcela Niculescu ◽  
Carol Blaziu Lehr

Increasing and widespread use of neonicotinoid insecticides in all world, together with their highly toxicity to invertebrates and environmental persistence mean that surface waters need to be monitored for these compounds. In the 2015, neonicotinoid insecticides have been incorporated in the watch list of substances for a European Union monitoring program (495/2015/ EU). A new method using automated solid phase extraction (SPE) with polymeric cartridges (OASIS HLB) followed by LC-MS/MS provided good separation of the most common neonicotindoid compounds. The method was developed for the determination of four neonicotinoid insecticides (nitenpyram, thiamethoxam, clothianidin, acetamiprid) in surface water with low limit of quantification (0.3-0.9 ng/L, nanograms per liter). Recoveries in surface water samples fortified at 200 ng/L for each compound ranged from 71.4 to 109.9 %; relative standard deviation ranged from 4 to 9%. The method was applied to water samples from four streams in Romania, Danube River and its tributaries (Arges River, Jiu River, and Olt River). The surface water samples were found to be contaminated clothianidin (1.08-6.4 ng/L) and by thiamethoxam (1.1-3.8ng/L). The highest concentrations were recorded in Danube River in Oltenita point (6.4ng/L) and in Gura-Vaii point (5.5ng/L). The concentration of acetamiprid and nitenpyram were situated below limit of quantification in all samples.



2019 ◽  
Vol 103 (2) ◽  
pp. 261-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
Srđan Subotić ◽  
Željka Višnjić-Jeftić ◽  
Vesna Đikanović ◽  
Slađana Spasić ◽  
Jasmina Krpo-Ćetković ◽  
...  


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document