Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4hhp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-19T17:05:46.542Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Peat mine as a threat to the diversity of aquatic beetles (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae) in the protected area Nature 2000 in Poland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 April 2024

Katarzyna Kuczyńska Open the ORCID record for Katarzyna Kuczyńska [Opens in a new window] ,
Robert Czerniawski Open the ORCID record for Robert Czerniawski [Opens in a new window]  and
Tomasz Krepski Open the ORCID record for Tomasz Krepski [Opens in a new window]
Katarzyna Kuczyńska*
Affiliation:
Department of Hydrobiology, Institute of Biology, University of Szczecin, Szczecin, Poland
Robert Czerniawski
Affiliation:
Department of Hydrobiology, Institute of Biology, University of Szczecin, Szczecin, Poland
Tomasz Krepski
Affiliation:
Department of Hydrobiology, Institute of Biology, University of Szczecin, Szczecin, Poland
*
Corresponding author: Katarzyna Kuczyńska; Email: katarzyna.kuczynska@phd.usz.edu.pl
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Peatlands, shaped by centuries of human activities, now face a primary threat from mining activities. Vulnerable to drainage and hydrological instability, peatland areas encounter challenges that compromise their ecological integrity. This study hypothesised that permanent water reservoirs within mines could serve as refugia for water beetles from adjacent areas prone to drying in the summer. Employing standard methods, including entomological scraping and water traps, samples were collected. Results revealed that, in most cases, water beetles exhibited a preference for the Nature 2000 area untouched by mining. Despite unfavourable conditions, the Nature 2000 area showcased a more diverse water beetle fauna. Remarkably, the selected Nature 2000 area, despite its identified degradation based on flora, remained a biodiversity hotspot for peatland water beetle fauna. The study underscores the significance of assessing insects, particularly beetles, as rapid responders to environmental changes. This evaluation holds crucial implications for peatland restoration planning and decision-making regarding mining investments in proximity to peatland areas.

Keywords

anthropopressionbiodiversitycoleopterapeatlandpeat mine
Type
Research Paper
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , First View , pp. 1 - 8
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Akkermann, R (1982) Möglichkeiten Und Zielsetzungen Für Eine Regeneration von Hochmooren–Zoologisch Betrachtet. Regeneration von Hochmooren. Informationen zu Naturschutz und Landschaftspflege in Nordwestdeutschland 3, 151–163.Google Scholar
Bernard, R, Buczyński, P and Tończyk, G (2002) Present state, threats, and conservation of dragonflies (Odonata) in Poland. Nature Conservation 59, 53–71.Google Scholar
Biesiadka, E and Kazimierska, I (2004) Contribution to the morphology of the third-instar larvae of Laccophilus Poecilus Klug (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae). Genus 15, 31–36.Google Scholar
Bonn, A, Allott, T, Evans, M, Joosten, H and Stoneman, R (eds) (2016) Peatland Restoration and Ecosystem Services: Science, Policy and Practice, 1st Edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139177788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, LE, Ramchunder, SJ, Beadle, JM and Holden, J (2016) Macroinvertebrate community assembly in pools created during peatland restoration. Science of the Total Environment 569–570, 361–372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.06.169CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buczyńska, E and Buczyński, P (2019) Aquatic insects of man-made habitats: environmental factors determining the distribution of caddisflies (Trichoptera), dragonflies (Odonata), and beetles (Coleoptera) in acidic peat pools. Journal of Insect Science 19(1), 17. https://doi.org/10.1093/jisesa/iez005CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buczyński, P, Żuralew, P, Melke, A, Przewoźny, M and Lubecki, K (2022) Stan poznania i nowe dane o właściwych chrząszczach wodnych (Coleoptera) powiatu pleszewskiego (Polska Zachodnia).Google Scholar
Burakowski, B (1976) Chrząszcze = Coleoptera, Adephaga Prócz Carabidae, Myxophaga, Polyphaga: Hydrophiloidea. Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe. Katalog Fauny Polski.Google Scholar
Downie, IS, Coulson, JC, Foster, GN and Whitfield, DP (1998) Distribution of aquatic macroinvertebrates within peatland pool complexes in the Flow Country, Scotland. Hydrobiologia 377, 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003267022820CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drinan, TJ, Foster, GN, Nelson, BH, O'Halloran, J and Harrison, SSC (2013) Macroinvertebrate assemblages of peatland lakes: assessment of conservation value with respect to anthropogenic land-cover change. Biological Conservation 158, 175–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drost, MBP (ed.) (1992) De Waterkevers van Nederland; Natuurhistorische Bibliotheek van de KNNV; Stichting Uitgeverij Koninklijke Nederlandse Natuurhistorische Vereniging: Utrecht.Google Scholar
Galewski, K (1971) Pływakowate – dytiscidae. In Mroczkowski, M and Mikołajczyk, W (eds), Klucze do Oznaczania Owadów Polski; XIX, Vol. 7f. Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, pp. 1–38.Google Scholar
Global Environment Centre & Wetlands International (eds) (2008) Assessment on Peatlands, Biodiversity, and Climate Change; United Nations Environment Programme, Global Environment Facility, Asia Pacific Network for Global Change Research, Global Environment Centre (Malaysia), Wetlands International. Kuala Lumpur: Wageningen.Google Scholar
Hannigan, E, Mangan, R and Kelly-Quinn, M (2011) Evaluation of the success of mountain blanket bog pool restoration in terms of aquatic macroinvertebrates. Biology & Environment: Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 111, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Irmler, U and Faunistisch-Ökologische Arbeitsgemeinschaft (eds) (1998) Das Dosenmoor: Ökologie eines regenerierenden Hochmoores; Faunistisch-Ökologische Arbeitsgemeinschaft: Kiel.Google Scholar
Joosten, H, Tanneberger, F and Moen, A (eds) (2017) Mires and Peatlands of Europe: Status, Distribution and Conservation. Stuttgart: Schweizerbart Science Publishers.Google Scholar
Koch, K (1989) Die Käfer Mitteleuropas, Ökologie, Band 1. Krefeld: Goecke & Evers, 440 ss.Google Scholar
Kolar, V and Boukal, DS (2020) Habitat preferences of the endangered diving beetle Graphoderus bilineatus: implications for conservation management. Insect Conservation and Diversity 13, 480–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kornobis, S (1979) Chrząszcze (Coleoptera) zbiorników wodnych Wolina i południowowschodniej części Uznamu. Bad. Fizjogr. Pol. Zach., C, 32, pp. 19–44.Google Scholar
Lohse, GA and Lucht, W (1989) Die Käfer Mitteleuropas: Supplementband Mit Katalogteil. Krefeld: Goecke & Evers.Google Scholar
Maltby, E and Acreman, MC (2011) Ecosystem services of wetlands: pathfinder for a new paradigm. Hydrological Sciences Journal 56, 1341–1359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manton, M, Makrickas, E, Banaszuk, P, Kołos, A, Kamocki, A, Grygoruk, M, Stachowicz, M, Jarašius, L, Zableckis, N, Sendžikaitė, J, Peters, J, Napreenko, M, Wichtmann, W and Angelstam, P (2021) Assessment and spatial planning for peatland conservation and restoration: Europe's trans-border Neman river basin as a case study. Land 10, 174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moller Pillot, HKM (2003) Hoe Waterdieren Zich Handhaven in Een Dynamische Wereld. 10 Jaar Onderzoek in de Roodloop, Een Bovenloopje van de Reusel in Noord-Brabant; Stichting het Noordbrabants Landschap; Haaren.Google Scholar
Nilsson, AN and Svensson, BW (1994) Dytiscid predators and culicid prey in two boreal snowmelt pools differing in temperature and duration. Annales Zoologici Fennici 31, 365–376.Google Scholar
Nilsson, AN and Svensson, BW (1995) Assemblages of dytiscid predators and culicid prey in relation to environmental factors in natural and clear-cut boreal swamp forest pools. Hydrobiologia 308, 183–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oksanen, J, Blanchet, FG, Kindt, R, Legendre, P, Minchin, PR, O'Hara, RB, Simpson, GL, Solymos, P, Stevens, MHH and Wagner, H (2022) Vegan: Community Ecology Package, Version 2.6–4, GitHub.Google Scholar
Pawlowski, J, Kubisz, D and Mazur, M (2002) Coleoptera Chrząszcze. [W:] Z. GŁOWACIŃSKI (red.): Czerwona Lista Zwierząt Ginących i Zagrożonych w Polsce. Instytut Ochrony Przyrody PAN, Kraków, pp. 88–110.Google Scholar
Przewoźny, M, Sienkiewicz, P and Konwerski, S (2012) Nowe dane o występowaniu chrząszczy (Coleoptera) z wybranych rodzin na terenie Rogalińskiego Parku Krajobrazowego. Część II. Chrząszcze wodne (Coleoptera aquatica). Wiadomości Entomologiczne 31, 251–261.Google Scholar
Ramin, K and Ghazal, T (2022) Bio ecology of aquatic and semi-aquatic insects of order Coleoptera in the world. Journal of Marine Science Research and Oceanography 5, 157–178.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, DM and Resh, VH (1993) Introduction to Freshwater Biomonitoring and Benthic Macroinvertebrates. In Rosenberg DM and Resh VH (eds), Freshwater Biomonitoring and Benthic Macroinvertebrates, Chapman & Hall, New York, pp. 1–9.Google Scholar
Sánchez-Fernández, D, Abellán, P, Velasco, J and Millán, A (2004) Selecting areas to protect the biodiversity of aquatic ecosystems in a semiarid Mediterranean region using water beetles. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 14, 465–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schouten, MGC (2002) Conservation and Restoration of Raised Bogs: Geological, Hydrological and Ecological Studies. Dublin: The Government Stationary Office, pp. 1–219.Google Scholar
Sharma, S and Pandey, P (2013) Research article role of aquatic beetles for water quality assessment. International Journal of Recent Scientific Research 4, 1673–1676.Google Scholar
Spitzer, K, Bezděk, A and Jaroš, J (1999) Ecological succession of a Relict Central European Peat Bog and variability of its insect biodiversity. Journal of Insect Conservation 3, 97–106. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009634611130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valladares, LF, Díaz, JA, Garrido, J, Sainz-Cantero, CE and Delgado, JA (2018) Fauna Ibérica, Volume 44: Coleoptera: Hydraenidae. Madrid: Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 516 pp.Google Scholar
van Duinen, GA (2013) Rehabilitation of Aquatic Invertebrate Communities in Raised Bog Landscapes; Mechanisms and Constraints in Biodiversity Conservation and Restoration. Enschede: Ipskamp Dr.Google Scholar
Van Duinen, G-JA, Brock, AMT, Kuper, JT, Leuven, RSEW, Peeters, TMJ, Roelofs, JGM, Van Der Velde, G, Verberk, WCEP and Esselink, H (2003) Do restoration measures rehabilitate fauna diversity in raised bogs? A comparative study on aquatic macroinvertebrates. Wetlands Ecology and Management 11, 447–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verberk, WCEP, van Duinen, GJA, Peeters, TM and Esselink, H (2001) Importance of variation in water-types for water beetle fauna (Coleoptera) in Korenburgerveen, a bog remnant in the Netherlands. Proceedings of the Section Experimental and Applied Entomology-Netherlands Entomological Society 12, 121–128.Google Scholar
Wigurska, J, Żyngiel, M, Konieczna, M, Jasnowska, J, Paterkowski, W and Popko, R (2015) Raport o Oddziaływaniu Na Środowisko Przedsięwzięcia Polegającego Na Powierzchniowej Eksploatacji Torfu Ze Złoża Rep-Towo. Biuro Doradztwa Ekologicznego i Inwestycyjnego Sp. z o. o..Google Scholar
Zych, A and Wolender, M (2004) Chrząszcze Coleoptera wybranych środowisk w okolicach Jeziora Głębokiego w Szczecinie. Przegląd Przyrodniczy 15, 29–41.Google Scholar