Seediscussions,stats,andauthorprofilesforthispublicationat:http://www.researchgate.net/publication/266020680

DecreasingofbiodiversityoffishpopulationsfromtheSavaRiverinBosniaandHerzegovina

ARTICLE·SEPTEMBER2014

CITATIONS

2

DOWNLOADS

78

VIEWS

69

6AUTHORS,INCLUDING:

ZlatkoNedićUniversityofTuzla

13PUBLICATIONS2CITATIONS

SEEPROFILE

SelmaBegovićUniversityofTuzla

1PUBLICATION2CITATIONS

SEEPROFILE

MustafaDogan

UniversityofTuzla

4PUBLICATIONS2CITATIONS

SEEPROFILE

RifetTerzićUniversityofTuzla

45PUBLICATIONS335CITATIONS

SEEPROFILE

Availablefrom:ZlatkoNedićRetrievedon:10July2015

Published by Basic Research Journal of Agricultural Science and Review

Basic Research Journal of Agricultural Science and Review ISSN 2315-6880 Vol. 3(5) pp. 35-40 July 2014 Available online http//www.basicresearchjournals.org Copyright ©2014 Basic Research Journal

Full Length Research Paper

Decreasing of biodiversity of fish populations from the Sava River in Bosnia and Herzegovina

*1Zlatko Nedić, 2Selma Begović, 3Mustafa Dogan, 4Elvira Hadžiahmetović Jurida, 5Jasmin Ferizbegović, 6Rifet Terzić

*1Secondary vocational school, Orašje; University of Tuzla, Faculty of Science, department of biology.

2Public health institute of Tuzla Canton, Unversity of Tuzla, Faculty of Law. 3International school of Zenica, University of Tuzla, Faculty of Science, department of biology.

4University of Tuzla, Faculty of Science, department of biology, Medical faculty of Tuzla. 5Veterinary station of Tuzla

6University of Tuzla, Faculty of Science, department of biology

*Corresponding author email: zlatko8679@hotmail.com; zlatko8679@hotmail.com

Accepted 02September, 2014

Abstract

The Sava River is one of the largest watercourses in Bosnia and Herzegovina, but unfortunately, unexplored enough in biology sense. The present study was conducted in northern Bosnia and Herzegovina during summer and autumn of 2013. The aim was to reveal, whether the number of fish species decreases or increases. A total of 120 fish individuals were collected represented 15 species from six fish families, i.e., Cyprinidae (Abramis brama, Cyprinus carpio, Squalius cephalus, Carassius gibelio, Ctenopharyngodon idella, Scardinius erythrophthalmus, Alburnus alburnus, Leuciscus aspius, Vimba vimba); Percidae (Perca fluviatilis and Sander lucioperca); Siluridae (Silurus glanis); Ameiuridae (Ameiurus nebulosus); Esocidae (Esox lucius) and Gobiidae (Neogobius fluviatilis).It was supposed that number of fish species decreasing in last 20 years for two following reasons; non implementation of Environmental laws and negative impact of anthropogenic factor. Keywords: the Sava River, ichthyofauna, fish biodiversity, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Posavina canton.

INTRODUCTION Bosnia and Herzegovina is a very heterogeneous area and that fact is reflected in all components of biodiversity in the living world, especially in terms of ichthyology (Nedić, 2013). Particularly significant aquatic ecosystem of Bosnia and Herzegovina is the Sava River. This is a huge watercourse which is very rich in regard of fish biodiversity of fish populations that makes special ecological relationships with other organisms and with their self (Habeković et al., 1997; Habeković et al., 1990; Habeković and Popović, 1991; Nedić et al., 2014; A. Adrović, University of Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina, personal communication). That watercourse makes a

scaffold of culture and nature treasure of the whole Bosnia and Herzegovina.

According to recent studies, the overall biodiversity of the ichthyofauna of Bosnia and Herzegovina represents

118 species, 70 genera and 27 families (Sofradžija, 2009). Particular importance of ichthyofauna of the country is possibility of fish cultivation and their exploitation for the purposes of nutrition (Skenderović, 2010).

In last 20 years the citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina are witnesses that their country has a lot of problems with state laws, because Bosnia and Herzegovina is unique

Published by Basic Research Journal of Agricultural Science and Review

Nedić et al. 36

Figure 1. Sampling locations on the lower reaches of the Sava River. Figure shows northern Bosnia and Herzegovina bordering with Republic of Croatia. Sampling locations are explaned on the map. Posavina canton is marked with yellow color.

country and does not have the laws on state level. Mentioned problem is reflecting many problems based on environmental laws and conservation of nature sources, especially conservation of ichthyofauna.

Important nature source of northern area of Bosnia and Herzegovina is ichthyofauna of the Sava River, because the citizens of mentioned region are most oriented on fish food and other activity based on fishing or fish researching (Nedić, 2013). The rapid development and prosperity in the world technique and technology, lifestyle changes of the world population, as well as the increasing occurrence of stress caused by work habits, leading to the need for increasing intake of light food, and healthier way of eating (Nedić, 2013).

The basic aim of our research was to find out whether the number of fish species is increased or decreased in last 20 years. The second aim is to find out and describe problems connected with environmental laws. Based on mentioned problems we established hypothesis that the number of fish species has declined in last 20 years due to lots of problems with implementation of environmental laws. MATERIALS AND METHOD For research purposes samplings were made at four locations in northern Bosnia and Herzegovina, between Bosanski Šamac from the west and Brčko District to the east side (Figure 1). We took the samples near three villages (Domaljevac, Tolisa and Donja Mahala) and one city area (Orašje). The site of all locations is in Posavina canton of Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Figure 1 and 2). Total longitudinal length of sampling locations

was approximately 40 km. Sampling was carried out in the summer and autumn

period of 2013, and we caught fish in cooperation with local fishers and for research purposes fishing nets were used. During the research we came out on the field 9 times (5 times in summer, and 4 times in autumn) and did not kill the fish that we sampled, just determined them to the species level. After that procedure, fishes were released to the watercourse.

Determination process was conducted at the research locations using identification key for fresh water fish determination (Vuković, 1973). Whole procedure was not complex, because all sampled fish individuals were recognizable and that was important because we did not have carry them to the laboratory for testing, whole determine procedure was conducted on the field. Most important in whole process was to save the life of the sampled fishes and some laboratory testing requires euthanasia of sampled organisms and we wanted to avoid that procedure.

After systematic determination we conducted statistical analysis which was performed using a non-parametric statistical test (chi-square test) in the computer program Statistica 7TM. Second part of our research was based on environmental law study and there were lawyers involved. Their task was to research all legal issues regarding environment and nature sources. RESULTS Studies of fish biodiversity of the Sava River were conducted at four locations, where we sampled 120 fish individuals, approximately 30 individuals at each location.

Published by Basic Research Journal of Agricultural Science and Review

37. Basic Res. J. Agric. Sci. Rev.

Table 1. Biodiversity of the total fish sample Fish species No of fish Percentage

Abramis brama 5 4,16 Alburnus alburnus 26 21,66 Ameiurusnebulosus 3 2,5 Carassius gibelio 14 11,66 Ctenopharyngodon idella 1 0,83 Cyprinus carpio 7 5,83 Esox lucius 6 5 Leuciscus aspius 2 1,66 Neogobius fluviatilis 36 30 Perca fluviatilis 5 4,16 Sander lucioperca 2 1,66 Scardinius erythrophtalmus 5 4,16 Silurus glanis 3 2,5 Squalius cephalus 4 3,33 Vimba vimba 1 0,83

Figure 2. Typical habitats at the four sampling locations

The share of individual fish species in the total sample in the studied area is shown in Table 1.

Totally, Cyprinidae is the largest family (Figure 3), with nine of identified species, namely: bream (Abramis brama Linnaeus, 1758), carp (Cyprinus carpio, Linnaeus, 1758), chub (Squalius cephalus, Linnaeus, 1758), crucian carp (Carassius gibelio, Bloch, 1782), grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella, Valencienes, 1844), rudd roach (Scardinius erythrophthalmus, Linnaeus, 1758), bleak (Alburnus alburnus, Linnaeus, 1758), asp (Leuciscus aspius, Linnaeus, 1758), vimba bream fish (Vimba vimba, Linnaeus, 1758). The number of fish individuals from cyprinid family is statistically significant (i.e., it is statistically higher) in compare with other fish families from the samples (p<0,05).

Family Percidae was represented by two species, namely: European perch (Perca gluviatilis, Linnaeus, 1758) and pike-perch zander (Sander lucioperca, Linnaeus, 1758) (Table 1, Figure 3).

Family Siluridae represented one species of wels

catfish (Silurus glanis, Linnaeus, 1758), while the family Ameiuridae represented a kind of american catfish (Ameiurus nebulosus, Lesueur, 1819) (Table 1, Figure 3).

Family Esocidae was represented by the type of pike (Esox lucius, Linnaeus, 1758), while the family Gobiidae was represented by monkey goby (Neogobius fluviatilis, Pallas, 1814) (Table 1, Figure 3).

The number of fish species from family Percidae, Siluridae, Ameiuridae, Esocidae and Gobiidae is significantly lower in comparison with cyprinid family which is the largest (p<0,05). Based on our research we emphasize that there is equal frequency of appearance in fish sample between five mentioned families (p>0,05). DISCUSSION Most biologists emphasize that Bosnia and Herzegovina is at the top of all world countries if we look nature treasure and living organisms, therefore, biodiversity

Published by Basic Research Journal of Agricultural Science and Review

Nedić et al. 38

Figure 3. Percentages of number of fish collected in six families. The largest number of species from total sample belonging to the cyprinid family.

Table 2. Changes in the fish occurrence in the Sava River since 1991. + and – indicate the presence and absence of fish species.

Fish species 1991. 1994. Present study

Abramis brama + + + Acipenser ruthenus + + - Alburnoides bipunctatus + + - Alburnus alburnus + + + Ameiurus nebulosus + + + Barbatula barbatula + - - Barbus barbus + + - Blicca bjoerkna + + - Carassius carassius + + - Carassius gibelio + + + Chondrostoma nasus + + - Cobitis elongata + - - Cobitis taenia + - - Ctenopharyngodon idella + + + Cyprinus carpio + + + Esox lucius + + + Gobio gobio + + - Gymnocephalus cernua + - - Gymnocephalus schraetser + - - Hucho hucho + - - Hypophthalmichthys molitrix + - - Lepomis gibbosus + + - Leuciscus aspius + + + Leuciscus idus + - - Leuciscus leuciscus + + - Lota lota + + - Misgurnus fossilis + + - Neogobius fluviatilis - + + Perca fluviatilis + + + Pseudorasbora parva + - - Rutilus rutilus + + - Rutilus virgo + - - Sander lucioperca + + + Scardinius erythrophthalmus + + + Silurus glanis + + + Squalius cephalus + + + Telestes souffia + - - Tinca tinca + + - Vimba vimba + + + Zingel streber + - - Zingel zingel + - - Total number of fish 40 28 15

Published by Basic Research Journal of Agricultural Science and Review

39. Basic Res. J. Agric. Sci. Rev. (Skenderović, 2010). Unfortunately, Bosnia and Herzegovina does not make some special efforts to educate its citizens about ecological problems and protection of nature sources (Goletić and Terzić, 2005, Terzić and Delić, 2008). The entire country has gone trough a difficult period during the war that lasted more than four years. Also, Bosnia and Herzegovina does not invest enough effort to promote its culture and nature sources and does not try to present them to the other countries. We suppose that the best example we can see in northern area of Bosnia and Herzegovina where the scaffold of real nature treasure is the Sava River with heterogeneous group of living creatures, unfortunately with tendencies of decreasing (Habeković et al., 1990, Habeković & Popović , 1991, Habeković et al., 1997, A. Adrović, University of Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina, personal communication). One of mentioned researches determined more than 40 fish species from the Sava River at several locations near Zagreb (Habeković et al., 1997). Scientists from Bosnia and Herzegovina led by doctor Rifat Škrijelj and doctor Avdo Sofradžija conducted research about fish biodiversity of fish populations at location between Bosanski Šamac and Brčko District. They determined 28 fish species in their sample, unfortunately, results never been published, because Bosnia and Herzegovina was in war condition (A. Adrović, University of Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina, personal communication). Table 2 shows comparison between three mentioned researches (two before approximately 20 years and the present study).

Statistically, we agree that the number of fish species before 20 years is significantly higher than at the moment (p<0,05). One of the reason for that condition is negative impact of anthropogenic factor which leads to the appearance of some invasive species like Neogobius fluviatilis (Piria et al., 2011). This species is distributed in polluted waters, and according to analysis of Agency for waters sources of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Sava River (northern Bosnia and Herzegovina) can be categorized as a beta-mezosaprobic waters group. Invasive species could overpower other species and can be a factor limiting growing and developing of other creatures (Nedić et al., 2014, Fijan, 2006; Adrović, 2012).

Particular important research for comparison with present research was conducted on the Sava River near Zagreb in Croatia (Habeković et al., 1997). On several locations scientists determined the following species: Petromyzontiformes spp.,, Salmo trutta morpha fario, Rutilus rutilus, Squalius cephalus, Leuciscus leuciscus, Chondrostoma nasus, Gobio gobio, Barbus barbus, Alburnus alburnus, Alburnoides bipunctatus, Vimba vimba, Rhodeus amarus, Carassius gibelio, Cyprinus carpio, Esox lucius, Perca fluviatilis. It is possible to see that the Sava River near Zagreb is much richer in the species number than that in the present study. Furthermore, we suppose that the Sava River near Zagreb is still clean because of existing Salmo trutta

morpha fario, which prefer to inhabit clean water with stoned riverbed (Jonsson and Sandlund, 1979, Mikavica and Sofradžija, 1988).

Some earlier studies at the Sava River showed that there were several species from Cobitidae family (Zrnčić et al., 2009). However, the present work did not find any species from that fish family, but research 20 years ago showed the presence three species, Cobitis taenia, Cobitis elongata and Misgurnus fossilis (Habeković et al., 1991). Mentioned data show that biodiversity of fish species in the Sava River has tendencies of decreasing.

Research at Drava River in Croatia showed high biodiversity of fish species (45 species) (Jelić et al., 2012). Sava River and Drava River have a very similar ecological condition and one of the reasons for higher biodiversity of Drava River could be better system of conservation and nature protection.

All mentioned data above could be good indicator for overall conclusion that the number of fish species has decreased in the last 20 years. We suppose that human impact is primary trigger for that fact, because Bosnia and Herzegovina did not establish environmental laws on state level and does not have competent institutions for conservation of nature sources and living organisms. For research purposes we involved lawyers to find out what kind of environmental laws exists in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Lawyers emphasize that absence of state environmental laws is consequence of constitutional organization of Bosnia and Herzegovina (S. Begović, Public health institute, Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina, personal communication). This state is divided by Dayton peace agreement on two entities (Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Republic of Srpska) and Brčko District like unique region of Bosnia and Herzegovina. We found several pieces of legislation as following: Water law of Federation Bosnia and Herzegovina (2006), Water law of Brčko District (2006), Water law of Republic of Srpska (2006). These laws show very complex system of water sources control.

Agency for water sources of Bosnia and Herzegovina has established special program of water protection named Strategy of water management of Federation Bosnia and Herzegovina (2010-2022). This capital document speaks about currently water situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Creators of mentioned document emphasize that primary problem of environmental law regulation is constitutional organization of Bosnia and Herzegovina and that organization is not similar to organizations of neighboring countries. Verification of Dayton agreement did not contribute to the solution of mentioned problems. The answer to the question why is simple. The entities and Brčko District of Bosnia and Herzegovina are not authorized to manage with common water sources on state level. On the other hand, entities and Brčko District are authorized to manage with national sources within their geographical boundaries. We suppose all mentioned

Published by Basic Research Journal of Agricultural Science and Review

organization and complex management have very high impact on nature sources and conservation of biodiversity of Bosnia and Herzegovina, especially conservation of fish species.

Also, important ecological problem of Bosnia and Herzegovina is bad human habit. The citizens are not involved in special programs of ecological education, because Bosnia and Herzegovina do not have referent institution led by experts which could conduct special educational program from ecology field. Statistical analysis showed that high percentage of citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina do not know almost nothing about biodiversity and ecology (Goletić and Terzić, 2005).

Based on biodiversity problem of northern Bosnia and Herzegovina we agree that Bosnia and Herzegovina needs to establish environmental legislative on state level, and to form a Center for ecology and nature sources on state level. That would be the first step for promotion ecology and nature treasure of Bosnia and Herzegovina. It is important to establish permanent monitoring of the Sava River and its tributaries to strengthening ecological awareness of citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Our opinion is that human populations of Bosnia and Herzegovina need to change bad human habits because these habits create negative anthropogenic impact on nature. Every citizen should be guided by fact that Bosnia and Herzegovina has singed Convention of Biodiversity and that involves all of citizens to protect nature treasure of their country. CONCLUSION Research of fish biodiversity of the Sava River was carried out in northern Bosnia and Herzegovina at four locations of research. We determined 15 fish species from six fish families, and most of species belong to the cyprinid family. Based on the present results, our opinion is that the number of fish species from the Sava River has declined in last 20 years. One of significant reasons for that is the absence of state environmental laws and absence of competent institution, which could conduct ecological education to educate citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina about protection and conservation nature sources. The second reason is the negative impact of anthropogenic factor, therefore, negative impact of citizens. Our recommendation is that Bosnia and

Nedić et al. 40 Herzegovina needs to establish permanent monitoring to prevent decreasing of fish species from the Sava River. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT We would like to thank Ana Marošević, master of Electrical Engineering for helping on technical matters, Toso Marsic, doctor of kineziology science, for statistical support. REFERENCES Adrović A (2012). Ribe Modraca: Ihtiološka monografija. NAMM. Tuzla. Fijan N (2006). Zaštita zdravlja riba. Poljoprivredni fakultet: Faculty of

Agriculture. Osijek. Goletić Š, Terzić R (2005). Ekološka edukacija. Mechanical Facutly.

University of Zenica. Habeković D, Homen Z, Fašaić, K (1990). ihtiofauna dijela rijeke Save.

Yugoslavian fisheries. 45:8-14. Habeković D, Popović J (1991). Stanje i iskorištenost ribljeg fonda u

rijeci Savi od Podsuseda do Strelečkog. Yugoslavian fisheries. 46:1-9.

Habeković D, Safner R, Aničić I, Treer T (1997). Ihtiofauna dijela rijeke Save. Croatian journal of fisheries. 55 (3):99-110.

Jelić M, Jelić D, Žutinić P, Ćaleta M (2012). Značajke faune riba donjjeg toka rijeke Drave I okolnih poplavljenih staništa kod Donjeg Miholjca (Istočna Hrvatska). Croatian Journal of Fisheries 70(4):153-167.

Jonsson B, Sandlund O T (1979). Environmental factors and life histories of isolated river stock of brown trout (Salmo trutta morpha fario) in S¢re Oas river system, Norway. Environmental Biology of Fishes. 4(1):43-54.

Mikavica D, Sofradžija A (1988). Possibility of construction of a Salmonidae fish farm in the hydrigraphic area of eastern Bosnia. Croatian Journal of Fisheries. 43(2):33-37.

Nedić Z (2013). Biodiversity of ectoparasites of fish from Sava river in Orašje region. Faculty of Science. Univerzity of Tuzla.

Nedić Z, Dogan M, Terzić R, Skenderović I, Hadžiametović JE (2014). Skin ectoparasites of fish species from lower flow of Sava river. Veterinaria. 64:1-2.

Piria M, Šprem N, Jakovlić I, Tomljanović T, Matulić D, Treer T, Aničić I, Safner R (2011). First record of round goby, Neogobius melanostomus in the Sava River, Croatia. Aquatic Invasions. 6(1):153-157.

Skenderović I (2010). Biodiverzitet parazitskih beskičmenjaka riba iz hidroakumulacije Modrac. Veterinary faculty. University of Sarajevo.

Sofradžija A (2009). Slatkovodne ribe Bosne i Hercegovine. Council of Bosnian experts. Sarajevo.

Terzić R, Delić Z (2008). Ecological crisis, ecological awareness and moral crisis of contemporary man. 7th Lošinj days of bioethics.

Vuković T (1973). Slatkovodne ribe Bosne i Hercegovine. Department for books and teaching sources. Sarajevo.

Zrnčić S, Orajić D, Šoštarić B, Ćaleta M, Bulj I, Zanella D, Šurmanović D (2009). Occurrence of parasites in Cobitidae from Croatian rivers draining into two different watersheds. Journal of Applied Ichthyology. 25(4):447-450.