EDP Sciences logo
Submit your paper
Search
Menu
All issues No 419 (2018) Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst., 419 (2018) 8 References
Open Access
Issue
Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst.
Number 419, 2018
Article Number 8
Number of page(s) 10
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/kmae/2017055
Published online 06 February 2018
  • Akasaka M, Takamura N. 2012. Hydrologic connection between ponds positively affects macrophyte α and γ diversity but negatively affects β diversity. Ecology 93: 967–973. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Akasaka M, Takamura N, Mitsuhashi H, Kadono Y. 2010. Effects of land use on aquatic macrophyte diversity and water quality of ponds. Freshw Biol 55: 909–922. [Google Scholar]
  • Alahuhta J, Kanninen A, Vuori K-M. 2012. Response of macrophyte communities and status metrics to natural gradients and land use in boreal lakes. Aquat Bot 103: 106–114. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Barko JW, Smart RM. 1983. Effects of organic-matter additions to sediment on the growth of aquatic plants. J Ecol 71: 161–175. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Biggs J, Williams P, Whitfield M, Nicolet P, Weatherby A. 2005. 15 years of pond assessment in Britain: results and lessons learned from the work of pond conservation. Aquat Conserv 15: 693–714. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Biggs J, Williams P, Whitfield M, Nicolet P, Brown C, Hollis J, Arnold D, Pepper T. 2007. The freshwater biota of British agricultural landscapes and their sensitivity to pesticides. Agric Ecosyst Environ 122: 137–148. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Biggs J, von Fumetti S, Kelly-Quinn M. 2017. The importance of small waterbodies for biodiversity and ecosystem services: implications for policy makers. Hydrobiologia 793: 3–39. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Bosiacka B, Pieńkowski P. 2012. Do biogeographic parameters matter? Plant species richness and distribution of macrophytes in relation to area and isolation of ponds in NW Polish agricultural landscape. Hydrobiologia 689: 79–90. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Broyer J, Curtet L. 2012. Biodiversity and fish farming intensification in French fishpond systems. Hydrobiologia 694: 205–218. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Carpenter SR, Caraco NF, Correll DL, Howarth RW, Sharpley AN, Smith VH. 1998. Nonpoint pollution of surface waters with phosphorus and nitrogen. Ecol Appl 8: 559–568. [Google Scholar]
  • Céréghino R, Boix D, Cauchie HM, Martens K, Oertli B. 2014. The ecological role of ponds in a changing world. Hydrobiologia 723: 1–6. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Chappuis E, Ballesteros E, Gacia E. 2012. Distribution and richness of aquatic plants across Europe and Mediterranean countries: patterns, environmental driving factors and comparison with total plant richness. J Veg Sci 23: 985–997. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Chester ET, Robson BJ. 2013. Anthropogenic refuges for freshwater biodiversity: their ecological characteristics and management. Biol Conserv 166: 64–75. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Crivelli AJ. 1983. The destruction of aquatic vegetation by carp. Hydrobiologia 106: 37–41. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Davies BR, Biggs J, Williams PJ, Whitfield M, Nicolet P, Sear D, Bray S, Maund S. 2008a. Comparative biodiversity of aquatic habitats in the European agricultural landscapes. Agric Ecosyst Environ 125: 1–8. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Davies BR, Biggs J, Williams PJ, Lee JT, Thompson S. 2008b. A comparison of the catchment sizes of rivers, streams, ponds, ditches and lakes: implications for protecting aquatic biodiversity in an agricultural landscape. Hydrobiologia 597: 7–17. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Declerck S, De Bie T, Ercken D, Hampel H, Schrijvers S, Van Wichelen J, Gillard V, Mandiki R, Losson B, Bauwens D, Keijers S, Vyverman W, Goddeeris B, De Meester L, Brendonck L, Martens K. 2006. Ecological characteristics of small farmland ponds: associations with land use practices at multiple spatial scales. Biol Conserv 131: 523–532. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Della Bella V, Bazzanti M, Dowgiallo MG, Iberite M. 2008. Macrophyte diversity and physico-chemical characteristics of Tyrrhenian coast ponds in central Italy: implications for conservation. Hydrobiologia 597: 85–95. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Dodds W, Whiles M. 2010. Freshwater ecology, 2nd ed. Cambridge, USA: Elsevier Academic Press, 813 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Downing JA, Prairie YT, Cole JJ, Duarte CM, Tranvik LJ, Striegl RG, McDowell WH, Kortelainen P, Caraco NF, Melack JM, Middelburg JJ. 2006. The global abundance and size distribution of lakes, ponds and impoundments. Limnol Oceanogr 51: 2388–2397. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Dudgeon D, Arthington AH, Gessner MO, Kawabata ZI, Knowler DJ, Léveque C, Naiman RJ, Prieur-Richard AH, Soto D, Stiassny MLJ, Sullivan CA. 2006. Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges. Biol Rev 81: 163–182. [Google Scholar]
  • Edvardsen A, Økland RH. 2006. Variation in plant species composition in and adjacent to 64 ponds in SE Norwegian agricultural landscapes. Aquat Bot 85: 92–102. [Google Scholar]
  • Eliáš P Jr., Dítě D, Kliment J, Hrivnák R, Feráková V. 2015. Red list of ferns and flowering plants of Slovakia, 5th ed. (October 2014). Biologia 70: 218–228. [Google Scholar]
  • European Commission, 2014, Environment 2000: Natura 2000–Pannonian biogeographical region, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/sites_hab/biogeog_regions/index_en.htm#pannonian. [Google Scholar]
  • Figuerola J, Santamaria L, Green AJ, Luque I, Alvarez R, Charalambidou I. 2005. Endozoochorous dispersal of aquatic plants: does seed gut passage affect plants performance? Am J Bot 92: 696–699. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Gee JHR, Smith BD, Lee KM, Griffiths SW. 1997. The ecological basis of freshwater pond management for biodiversity. Aquat Conserv 7: 91–104. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Gledhill DG, James P, Davies DH. 2008. Pond density as a determinant of aquatic species richness in an urban landscape. Landsc Ecol 23: 1219–1230. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hindák F, Hindáková A. 2001. Červený zoznam siníc/cyanobaktérií a rias Slovenska. 2. Verzia, (December 2001). Ochr Prír 20 (suppl): 14–22. [Google Scholar]
  • Hinden H, Oertli B, Menetrey N, Sager L, Lachavanne JB. 2005. Alpine pond biodiversity: what are the related environmental variables? Aquat Conserv 15: 613–624. [Google Scholar]
  • Hrivnák R, Oťaheľová H, Kochjarová J, Paľove-Balang P. 2013. Effect of environmental conditions on species composition of macrophytes in two distinct biogeogrphical regions of Central Europe. Knowl Manag Aquat Ecosyst 411: 09. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hrivnák R, Kochjarová J, Oťaheľová H, Paľove-Balang P, Slezák M, Slezák P. 2014. Environmental drivers of macrophyte species richness in artificial and natural aquatic water bodies − comparative approach from two central European regions. Ann Limnol-Int J Limnol 50: 269–278. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Janauer GA. Methods. In: Janauer GA, Hale P, Sweeting R (eds.) Macrophyte inventory of the river Danube: a pilot study. Large Rivers: Arch Hydrobiol, 2003, pp. 9–16. [Google Scholar]
  • Jones JI, Li W, Maberly SC. 2003. Area, altitude and aquatic plant diversity. Ecography 26: 411–420. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Kadoya T, Suda S, Tsubaki Y, Washitani I. 2008. The sensitivity of dragonflies to landscape structure differs between life-history groups. Landsc Ecol 23: 461–467. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Kadoya T, Akasaka M, Aoki T, Takamura N. 2011. A proposal of framework to obtain an integrated biodiversity indicator for agricultural ponds incorporating the simultaneous effects of multiple pressures. Ecol Indic 11: 1396–1402. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Kolada A. 2016. The use of helophytes in assessing eutrophication of temperate lowland lakes: added value? Aquat Bot 129: 44–54. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Lacoul P, Freedman B. 2006. Environmental influences on aquatic plants in freshwater ecosystems. Environ Rev 14: 89–136. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Landucci F, Tichý L, Šumberová K, Chytrý M. 2015. Formalized classification of species-poor vegetation: a proposal of a consistent protocol for aquatic vegetation. J Veg Sci 26: 791–803. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Linton S, Goulder R. 2000. Botanical conservation value related to origin and management of ponds. Aquat Conserv 10: 77–91. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Lukács BA, Sramkó G, Molnár A. 2013. Plant diversity and conservation value of continental temporary pools. Biol Conserv 158: 393–400. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Lukács BA, Tóthméréz B, Borics G, Várbíró G, Juhász P, Kiss B, Müller Z, Tóth LG, Erős T. 2015. Macrophyte diversity of lakes in the Pannnon Ecoregion (Hungary). Limnologica 53: 74–83. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Lukács, BA, Mesterházy A, Vidéki R, Király G. 2016. Alien aquatic vascular plants in Hungary (Pannonian ecoregion): historical aspects, data set and trends. Plant Biosyst 150: 388–395. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Marhold K, Hindák F. 1998. Checklist of non-vascular and vascular plants of Slovakia, Bratislava: Veda, 688 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Matuszkiewicz W. 2008. Przewodnik do oznaczania zbiorovisk roślinnych Polski [Guide of plant communities in Poland], Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, 540 p. [Google Scholar]
  • McCullagh P, Nelder J.A. 1989. Generalized Linear Models, 2nd ed. London: Chapman & Hall, 532 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Medvecká J, Kliment J, Májeková J, Halada Ľ, Zaliberová M, Gojdičová E, Feráková V, Jarolímek I. 2012. Inventory of alien species of Slovakia. Preslia 84: 257–309. [Google Scholar]
  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being − synthesis, Washington DC: Island Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Neff KP, Baldwin AH. 2005. Seed dispersal into wetlands: techniques and results for restored tidal freshwater marsh. Wetlands 25: 392–404. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Nicolet P, Biggs J, Fox G, Hodson MJ, Reynolds C, Whitfield M, Williams P. 2004. The wetland plant and macroinvertebrate assemblages of temporary ponds in England and Wales. Biol Conserv 120: 261–278. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Oertli B, Joye DA, Castella E, Juge R, Cambin D, Lachavanne J.B. 2002. Does size matter? The relationship between pond area and biodiversity. Biol Conserv 104: 59–70. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, Legendre P, Minchin PR, O'Hara RB, Simpson GL, Solymos P, Stevens MHH, Wagner H. 2016. Vegan: Community Ecology Package. R package version 2.3-3, http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan. [Google Scholar]
  • Oťaheľová H, Valachovič M, Hrivnák R. 2007. The impact of environmental factors on the distribution patter of aquatic plants along the Danube River corridor (Slovakia). Limnologica 37: 290–302. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • R Core Team. 2016. R: a language and environment for statistical computing, Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing, https://www.R-project.org/. [Google Scholar]
  • Rhazi L, Grillas P, Saber ER, Rhazi M, Brendonck L, Waterkeyn A. 2012. Vegetation of Mediterranean temporary pools: a fading jewel? Hydrobiologia 689: 23–36. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Rossi J-P. 2011. Rich: an R package to analyse species richness. Diversity 3: 112–120. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Sayer C, Andrews K, Shilland E, Edmonds N, Edmonds-Brown R, Patmore I, Emson D, Axmacher J. 2012. The role of pond management for biodiversity conservation in an agricultural landscape. Aquat Conserv 22: 626–638. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Scheffer M, Carpenter SR. 2003. Catastrophic regime shifts in ecosystems: linking theory to observation. Trends Ecol Evol 18: 648–656. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Spałek K. 2006. Threatened plant communities as an indicator of fishponds value: an example from Silesia (SW Poland). In: Gafta D, Akeroyd J, (eds.) Nature conservation. Concepts and practice. Heidelberg: Springer Verlag, 195–198. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Šumberová K, Ducháček M, Lososová Z. 2012. Life-history traits controlling the survival of Tillaea aquatica: a threatened wetland plant species in intensively managed fishpond landscapes of the Czech Republic. Hydrobiologia 689: 91–110. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Svitok M, Hrivnák R, Kochjarová J, Oťaheľová H, Paľove-Balang P. 2016. Environmental thresholds and predictors of macrophyte species richness in aquatic habitats in central Europe. Folia Geobot 51: 227–238. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Szoszkiewicz K, Ciecierska H, Kolada A, Schneider SC, Szwabińska M, Ruszczyńska J. 2014. Parameters structuring macrophyte communities in rivers and lakes − results from a case study in North-Central Poland. Knowl Manag Aquat Ecosyst 415: 08. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Toivonen H, Huttunen P. 1995. Aquatic macrophytes and ecological gradients in 57 small lakes in southern Finland. Aquat Bot 51: 197–221. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Valachovič M. (ed.) 1995. Rastlinné spoločenstvá Slovenska 1. Pionierska vegetácia mokradí [Plant communities of Slovakia 1. Pioneer vegetation]. Bratislava: Veda 184 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Waldon B. 2012. The conservation of small water reservoirs in the Krajeńskie Lakeland (North-West Poland). Limnologica 42: 320–327. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Wezel A, Oertli B, Rosset V, Arthaoud F, Leroy B, Smith R, Angélibert S, Bornette G, Vallod D, Robin J. 2014. Biodiversity patterns of nutrient-rich fish ponds and implications for conservation. Limnology 15: 213–223. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Wheeler B, Torchiano M. 2016. lmPerm: Permutation tests for linear models. R package version 2.1.0. [Google Scholar]
  • Williams P, Whitfield M, Biggs J, Bray S, Fox G, Nicolet P, Sear D. 2004. Comparative diversity of rivers, streams, ditches and ponds in an agricultural landscape in Southern England. Biol Conserv 115: 329–341. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Zelnik I, Potisek M, Gaberščik A. 2012. Environmental conditions and macrophytes of Karst ponds. Pol J Environ Stud 21: 1911–1920. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.