106urn:lsid:arphahub.com:pub:dddd9632-2f62-529d-aa08-fcb37c695039Acta Ichthyologica et PiscatoriaAIeP0137-15921734-1515Pensoft Publishers10.3897/aiep.52.7964679646Research ArticleOsteichthyesFaunistics & DistributionEastern EuropeEuropeRomaniaLife below waterEcological status of fish fauna from Razim Lake and the adjacent area, the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, RomaniaNăstaseAurel1aurel.nastase@ddni.rohttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-8376-2259InvestigationWriting - review and editingHonțȘtefan1InvestigationIaniMarian1https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0484-1128InvestigationParaschivMarian1InvestigationCernișencuIrina1InvestigationNăvodaruIon1VisualizationDanube Delta National Institute for Research and Development, Department of Biodiversity, Conservation, and Sustainable Use of Natural Resources, Tulcea, RomaniaDanube Delta National Institute for Research and DevelopmentTulceaRomania
20222903202252143525E066544-BC97-5999-8E62-CFBF081BD4AE89965890-B6CD-431A-9877-B03DE2545C492112202119022022Aurel Năstase, Ștefan Honț, Marian Iani, Marian Paraschiv, Irina Cernișencu, Ion NăvodaruThis is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.http://zoobank.org/89965890-B6CD-431A-9877-B03DE2545C49
The aim of this study was to determine the ecological status of fish fauna of Razim Lake under the conditions of the water salinity changing from brackish, almost 70 years ago, into freshwater nowadays. The natural processes of siltation and organic deposits, characteristic of Danube Delta lake complexes, intensified in the last decades and included also Razim Lake. The presently reported study of Razim Lake and the adjacent area was undertaken in 2020 with intention to cover fish fauna collected with three different sampling methods (electrofishing, gillnetting, and seining). For each sampling method, Catch per Unit Effort (CPUE), relative abundance, and biomass were determined, as well as selected ecological parameters to determine ecological status of richness species in the area. Published data included 55 fish species, mainly marine and euryhaline, but in 2020 only 43 species were reported. Also, the species composition shifted from marine ones to freshwater or euryhaline ones. Of those 43 species captured in 2020 from Razim Lake and neighboring areas, 39 were native and four were non-native, including a newcomer, the Chinese sleeper, Perccottusglenii Dybowski, 1877. Few species were migratory, reophilous, or reophilous-stagnophilous which rarely enter Razim Lake, but the majority were limnophilous or stagnophilous-reophilous species. Four species were dominant in terms of the abundance; Bliccabjoerkna (Linnaeus, 1758); Rutilusrutilus (Linnaeus, 1758); Alburnusalburnus (Linnaeus, 1758); and Carassiusgibelio (Bloch, 1782). In terms of the biomass the dominants were: Cyprinuscarpio Linnaeus, 1758; Carassiusgibelio; Sanderlucioperca (Linnaeus, 1758); Pelecuscultratus (Linnaeus, 1758); and Bliccabjoerkna. Some differences between sampling methods used were observed. Eudominant, euconstant, and main species were Bliccabjoerkna and the majority of fish species were accessories, with differences amongst sampling methods used. Fish diversity parameters indicate a stable ichthyocoenosis, more stable along the lake shoreline. Ecological indicators of fish fauna from Razim Lake in 2020 grade the water lake quality as a moderate ecological class according to the Water Framework Directive of the European Union.
fish species richnessabundancebiomassfish ecology indicatorswater ecological statusIntroduction
The Razim–Sinoie lake complex is situated in the southern part of the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve (DDBR) and formed in an old gulf of the Black Sea—Halmirys—with water surface of 86 770 ha. The largest lake in the complex is Razim Lake with 41 400 ha (Gâştescu 1971; Gâştescu and Ştiucă 2008; Staras, unpublished*). The lake complex has two connections with the Black Sea from Sinoie Lake through the Periboina and Edighiol canals. These two openings to the sea maintain fish diversity and productivity of the entire lake complex (Staras, unpublished). Razim Lake is connected with Sinoie Lake through two canals (named Canal II and Canal V) that provide slightly brackish water for Razim Lake. The hydrotechnical works of the early 1970s transformed Razim Lake into a reservoir with 1 billion m3 of freshwater (Staras, unpublished). Moreover, the salinity of Razim Lake changed over a short time, as proven by Leonte et al. (1956, 1960), from 2.5‰ in 1951 to 0.5‰in 1956 due to the freshwater influx from the Danube River. The Danube River, via the Sfântu Gheorghe arm as a major path, transports water and solids into Razim Lake via the Dunăvăț, Dranov, Mustaca, and Lipoveni canals. The mean monthly flows on Sf. Gheorghe arm indicate 9.66% of total flow (135 m3 · s–1 liquid flows) and almost 2 million t · year–1 (solid flows) from the total flows of the arm by continuous lateral discharge to the Razim system (Driga 2004). The general water balance shows that the share of inputs is 90% from supply canals (Dranov, Dunăvăț, and Lipoveni canals), 9% from precipitation, and 1% from small rivers (Slava, Taița, Telița, Agighiol) and the exits from the system are represented by evapotranspiration (15%) and 85% irrigation and evacuation (Bondar cited by Staras, unpublished). The Danube River is the water supplier for all Danube Delta lakes including Razim Lake with which it has also an active exchange of fish fauna, especially at high river water levels because of the high degree of siltation of connecting canals in 2020. The diversity and structure of the fish community varies amongst lakes and can be regarded as a good indicator of the ecological state of the lakes. The aim of this study was to describe the ecological status of fish fauna from Razim Lake and the adjacent area, based on a fish survey conducted in 2020 and to discuss changes, based on earlier scientific publications.
Materials and methods
Study area, sampling period, fish, and water measurements. The study area was represented by five sectors of Razim Lake, a large-surface lake: Fundea Gulf (1), Holbina Gulf (2), southern lake (3), Mustaca sector north and south and Oaia Lake (4), west Lake Enisala (5), and canals (Dunăvăț, Mustaca, Dranov) (Fig. 1), with each sector being sampled at multiple sites. The ichthyofauna was sampled in Razim Lake and the adjacent area in July, August, and September of 2020. For biometric measurements, an ichthyometer with an accuracy of 1 mm per 50 cm for fish length and for weight, an electronic scale with an accuracy of 1 g per 5 kg were used. Geographical coordinates and physical-chemical parameters observed in the area were recorded with a Garmin device and Hach multiparameter, as well as a Secchi disc for water depth and transparency.
Investigation area from sectors of Razim Lake in the year 2020 (1 = Fundea Gulf, 2 = Holbina Gulf, 3 = South Lake, 4 = Mustaca sector north and south and Oaia Lake, 5 = west Lake Enisala).
https://binary.pensoft.net/fig/664672
Fish sampling. The fish sampling and Catch per Unit Effort calculation (CPUE) was done in accordance with EU recommendations by use of common methods:
Electriofishing with SAMUS 1000 W electrofisher device, transect with multiple electric points during 10 min per site, the catch being standardized at individuals or g · h
–1 of fishing effort (for shoreline or small canals from compact reed developed nearby lake).
Passive gillnet fishing (stationary 12 h by night, the catch being standardized at 100 m
2 gillnets per night): commercial gillnets or Nordic gillnets multi-meshes fishing tools (30 m length × 1.8 m high each). The Nordic gillnets have 12 randomly joined panels, each panel being 2.5 m in length, with multiples meshes: 6, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 30, 35, 45, and 55 mm (Nyberg and Degerman 1988; Năvodaru 2008) (main tools used in Razim Lake and adjacent area).
Seine fishing with 2 wings of 100 m length each and a codend of 7 mm knot-to-knot mesh size. Standardization to one haul of active fishing (1 h).
Directly observed species from angling and some traditional fishing tools (fyke net, hand cast net, fish landing) just for fish species identification, without other standardization.
Taxonomy and ecology. The fish species scientific names used are consistent with the Eschmeyer’s Catalog of Fishes (Fricke et al. 2021). The specimens collected were identified after Antipa (1909), Cărăusu (1952), Bănărescu (1964), and taxonomic name and support knowledge after revision by some authors (Otel et al. 1992, 1993; Kottelat 1997; Otel 2001, 2007; Sindrilariu et al. 2002; Nelson 2006; Kottelat and Freyhof 2007; Năvodaru and Năstase 2011; Năstase et al. 2017, 2019a; Froese and Pauly 2021; Năstase, unpublished*). Relative abundance and biomass for each species and sampling methods were calculated as standard CPUE (Catch Per Unit Effort). The relative abundance or dominance (D) for each species and sampling methods was calculated as the proportion of species to total catch (Mühlenberg 1993; Sindrilariu et al. 2002). The relative abundance or dominance (D) for each species and sampling methods was calculated as the proportion of species to total catch (Di = ni · 100N–1 (%), where, Di = dominance of species i, ni = individuals of the species i, and N = total number of individuals) (Mühlenberg 1993; Sindrilariu et al. 2002). The frequency of occurrence (F) or constancy (C) for each species and sampling method was calculated as the proportion of samples containing a species from the total number of samples (Ci = bi · 100a–1 (%), where, Ci = frequency of occurrence of species i, bi = the number of samples in which species i was observed and a = total number of samples) (Schwerdtfeger 1975; Sindrilariu et al. 2002). Ecological significance (W) is a relation between frequency (C) and dominance (D) (W = D · 100C–1). For frequency, five classes were used; six classes were used for abundance/dominance data analysis, and seven classes were used for ecological significance (Table 1).
Frequency (constancy), dominance, and ecological significance classification according to: Botnariuc and Vădineanu 1982; Gomoiu and Skolka 2001; Șindrilariu et al. 2002 Sârbu and Benedek 2004.
Category
Symbol
[%]
Dominance
Sporadic
D1
<1
Subrecedent
D2
1–2
Recedent
D3
2–4
Subdominant
D4
4–8
Dominant
D5
8–16
Eudominant
D6
>16
Constancy
Very rare
C1
0.0–10.0
Rare
C2
10.1–25
Widespread
C3
25.1–45.0
Frequent
C4
45.1–70.0
Very frequent
C5
70.1–100
Ecological significance
Accidental-adventitious
W1A
<0.001
Accidental
W1
<0.1
Accessory
W2
0.1–1.0
Associate
W3
1.0–5.0
Complementary
W4
5.0–10.0
Characteristic
W5
10.0–20.0
Main, leading
W6
>20
To determine ecological status of the lake, some quantitative ecological parameters were chosen as most expressive for fish communities: Relative Abundance in Number per Unit Effort (NPUE), Relative Biomass in Biomass Per Unit Effort (BPUE), the biodiversity index according Shannon–Wiener Index Hs, and Equitability Index = Evenness index (E) as in Năstase et al. (2019a, 2021) (Table 2). An ecological status classification matrix in accordance with the Water Framework Directive (WFD) is presented in Table 2 regarding the fish community. The Biodiversity Index (Hs), according to the Shannon–Wiener formulae, as well as maximal fish Diversity (Hmax) and Equitability (Evenness) Index (E) were calculated. The Equitability Index describes the quantum of unequal distribution of different effective species proportion as an ideal community, ranges between 0 and 1. The Shannon–Wiener Index varies from values of 0 for communities with one species, to various other values for more mixed species (Odum 1975; Botnariuc and Vădineanu 1982; Gomoiu and Skolka 2001; Sârbu and Benedek 2004). Formulas used:
Ecological matrix class for fish parameters assessment in accordance with the WFD (expert judgement based) according to the “one out, all out” principle.
Status
Color
Class
NPUE (n)
BPUE [g]
Hs
E
Very bad
Red
I
< 25
< 500
< 1
< 0.2
Bad
Orange
II
25–100
500–2000
1.0–1.4
0.2–0.4
Moderate
Yellow
III
100–250
2000–5000
1.4–1.8
0.4–0.6
Good
Green
IV
250–500
5000–10000
1.8–2.2
0.6–0.8
Very good
Blue
V
>500
>10000
>2.2
>0.8
NPUE = Number Per Unit Effort, BPUE = Biomass Per Unit Effort, Hs = Shannon–Wiener Biodiversity Index, E = Evenness Index (Equitability Index).
Hs = –Σ pi ∙ ln(pi)
according Shannon–Wiener formulae
pi = Nr ∙ N–1
where pi is the dominance; Nr is the number of individuals belonging to a certain species; and N = total number of individuals in a sample.
E = Hs ∙ Hmax–1
According to the Water Framework Directive, it is desirable to test and apply known ecological parameters that could improve the methods of assessing the ecological status, using, when no other methods are available, even expert judgement analysis (this analysis from papers was thought of and used in a European project in 2014: Black Sea e-Eye - Innovative Instruments for Environmental Analysis in NW Black Sea Basin, to improve methodology after Moss et. al. (2003) and Ibram et al. (2015). The ecological lake classification matrix is in accordance with the Water Framework Directive. EU Water Framework) has five (I–V) limits classes marked with different colors. Actually, there are yet no developed statistical threshold limits classes (I–V) for those chosen ecological parameters (NPUE, BPUE, Hs, E) according to the WFD water quality regarding fish, but expert judgement was used as a future proposal. Class limits was proposed by the present authors, based on field experience and expert judgement in the Danube Delta (Năstase et al. 2019a, 2021). In the summer of 2020, sampling was conducted using 77 Nordic gillnets, totaling 2310 m of passive nets per night, 190 minutes of electric fishing, five seine active hauls and 48 commercial gillnets 1440 m in total of passive nets-nights–1 in total (Table 3).
Fishing tools used in Razim Lake in 2020 and their yield and effort.
Sampling site
N gillnets
Electr.
C gillnets
Seine
Total catch
Name
No.
No.
L [m]
[min]
No.
L [m]
H No.
N
[g]
Enisala
5
14
420
30
4
120
5
1537
68653.9
Fundea
1
12
360
30
3
90
0
2029
83557.5
Mustaca N
4
12
360
30
7
210
0
789
87343
Mustaca S
4
12
360
30
6
180
0
843
86432
Center
4
3
90
0
15
450
0
385
46174
Holbina
2
12
360
30
6
180
0
1029
70585
Periteasca S
3
12
360
30
3
90
0
1245
76443
Canal Mustaca
4
0
0
10
0
0
0
114
33403
Oaia mare
4
0
0
0
4
120
0
71
20826
TOTAL Fish
77
2310
190
48
1440
5
8042
573417.4
Crayfish
36
1446
N gillnets = Nordic gillnets, Electr. = electrofishing device, C gillnets = commercial gillnets, H No. = number of hauls, N = number of fish/crayfish.
Results
In the summer of 2020, we captured 8042 fish individuals with more than 573 kg of fish and 36 individuals weighting in a total of almost 1.5 kg of crayfish (Table 3).
Species richness. All captured individuals belong to 43 fish species and one crayfish species—Pontastacusleptodactylus. Overall, Razim’s ichthyofauna is dominated by limnophilous or stagnophilic-rheophilic species, such as white bream, Bliccabjoerkna (Linnaeus, 1758) and roach, Rutilusrutilus (Linnaeus, 1758), followed by characteristic-complementary-associated species, such as ziege, Pelecuscultratus (Linnaeus, 1758); European perch, Percafluviatilis Linnaeus, 1758; pike-perch, Sanderlucioperca (Linnaeus, 1758); common bream, Abramisbrama (Linnaeus, 1758); bleak, Alburnusalburnus (Linnaeus, 1758); and gibel carp, Carassiusgibelio (Bloch, 1782), but the majority of species occur sporadically in the Lake, with a significant number of species being accidentally found here (Table 4). The numbers for the goby species—monkey goby, Neogobiusfluviatilis (Pallas, 1814); round goby, Neogobiusmelanostomus (Pallas, 1814); racer goby, Babkagymnotrachelus (Kessler, 1857); bighead goby, Ponticolakessleri (Günther, 1861); syrman goby, Ponticolasyrman (von Nordmann, 1840); mushroom goby, Ponticolaeurycephalus (Kessler, 1874)—are worrying, as they are in a continuous decrease, being limited only to certain favorite places of the Lake, especially in the areas with submerged stones (used to avoid clogging of the mouths of the canals) and gravel areas, compared to the previous years when they dominated even sandy areas. It can be said that this phenomenon of numerical reduction of the gobies populations in Razim Lake is due to the obvious habitat changes which include increase of siltation, the mud of the Razim Lake transforming the lake into a pond, typical for lake complexes from the Danube Delta. Another question mark is the existence of percarina, Percarinademidoffi von Nordmann, 1840 (Percidae), a non-native not invasive, but sensitive species, first recorded 1986 (Otel and Bănărescu 1986). In recent years, it has not been found in Razim Lake, in the place where this species had formed vigorous populations in the past, even stronger populations than in its native range (Don River), the cause probably also being habitat change.
Ecological significance of fish species from Razim Lake and the adjacent area (also included classes “Present = P” for species which could not be standardized, just observed).
Species
Nordic gillnets
Commercial gillnets
Electrofishing device
Seine
Other fishing gear
D
C
W
D
C
W
D
C
W
D
C
W
Abramisbrama
D1
C2
W1
D4
C2
W3
D2
C3
W3
P
Alburnusalburnus
D4
C5
W4
D5
C5
W5
D4
C5
W4
P
Alosaimmaculata
D1
C1
W1A
Alosatanaica
D2
C3
W2
D1
C2
W1
P
Pontastacusleptodactylus
D1
C3
W2
D1
C1
W1
D1
C3
W2
P
Atherinaboyeri
D5
C2
W3
Babkagymnotrachelus
D1
C3
W2
P
Ballerussapa
D1
C1
W1A
Bliccabjoerkna
D6
C5
W6
D2
C1
W1
D4
C4
W3
D6
C5
W5
P
Carassiuscarassius
D2
C1
W2
Carassiusgibelio
D1
C3
W2
D6
C5
W6
D4
C3
W3
D3
C5
W3
P
Clupeonellacultriventris
D6
C4
W4
D1
C2
W2
P
Cobitistanaitica
D1
C1
W1
Ctenopharyngodonidella
D1
C2
W1
P
Cyprinuscarpio
D1
C1
W1A
D5
C3
W3
D4
C4
W3
D1
C2
W2
P
Esoxlucius
D1
C1
W1
D1
C1
W1
P
Gymnocephaluscernuus
D1
C2
W2
Hypophthalmichthysmolitrix
D1
C1
W1A
Knipowitschiacaucasica
D2
C2
W2
Lepomisgibbosus
D1
C1
W1A
D1
C1
W1
D1
C2
W1
Leuciscusaspius
D1
C2
W1
D2
C2
W2
D1
C3
W2
P
Mugilcephalus
D1
C1
W1A
Misgurnusfossilis
D1
C1
W1A
Ponticolaeurycephalus
D1
C1
W1A
D5
C2
W3
Neogobiusfluviatilis
D1
C1
W1
D1
C1
W1
D4
C4
W3
P
Ponticolakessleri
D2
C2
W2
Neogobiusmelanostomus
D1
C2
W1
P
Pelecuscultratus
D5
C5
W5
D2
C5
W3
P
Percafluviatilis
D4
C5
W4
D2
C1
W2
D4
C3
W3
D4
C5
W4
P
Perccottusglenii
D1
C1
W1A
D1
C1
W1
Petroleuciscusborysthenicus
D1
C1
W1A
Ponticolasyrman
D1
C1
W1A
D1
C2
W1
P
Proterorhinusmarmoratus
D1
C1
W1
Pungitiusplatygaster
D1
C1
W1
Rhodeusamarus
D1
C1
W1
D2
C2
W2
Rutilusrutilus
D5
C5
W5
D6
C5
W6
D6
C5
W6
P
Sanderlucioperca
D2
C4
W3
D4
C3
W3
D3
C3
W2
D5
C5
W5
P
Scardiniuserythrophthalmus
D4
C4
W3
D1
C1
W1
D4
C3
W3
D5
C5
W4
P
Silurusglanis
D1
C1
W1A
D1
C1
W1
D1
C1
W1
Syngnathusabaster
D1
C1
W1A
D1
C3
W2
P
Tincatinca
D1
C1
W1
D4
C1
W2
Umbrakrameri
D1
C1
W1
Vimbavimba
D1
C2
W1
D1
C1
W1
Anguillaanguilla
P
Out of the 43 fish species captured or observed in Razim Lake, nearly 1/3 are without commercial value (small fish) and 2/3 (30 fish species) have commercial value. From these 30 commercial fish species, more than 1/4 have high commercial value—pontic shad, Alosaimmaculata Bennett, 1835; pike-perch, Sanderlucioperca; Wels catfish, Silurusglanis Linnaeus, 1758; common carp, Cyprinuscarpio Linnaeus, 1758; European eel, Anguillaanguilla (Linnaeus, 1758); and northern pike, Esoxlucius Linnaeus, 1758). Almost half of the species have medium market value (like gibel carp, rudd, roach, tench, perch, bream, etc.) and almost 1/4 have low economic value (goby species). Of the 43 fish species, the majority are native and four are non-native species: Chinese sleeper, Perccottusglenii Dybowski, 1877; silver carp, Hypophthalmichthysmolitrix (Valenciennes, 1844); grass carp, Ctenopharyngodonidella (Valenciennes, 1844); pumpkinseed sunfish, Lepomisgibbosus (Linnaeus, 1758). While some of the species are migratory, reophilous or reofilous-stagnofilous, such as Alosaimmaculata, Anguillaanguilla, and white-eye bream, Ballerussapa (Pallas, 1814), occur rarely in the Lake, others are stagnofilous-reophilous or limnophilous species which are the majority. The stagnophilous (limnophilous) species, like Caucasian dwarf goby, Knipowitschiacaucasica (Berg, 1916) and mudminnow, Umbrakrameri Walbaum, 1792, are very well represented in Razim Lake or the adjacent area.
Ecological status. The main species (eudominant, very frequent) in Razim Lake and adjacent waters are Bliccabjoerkna, Rutilusrutilus and Alburnusalburnus, but the majority of the species are accessory, as well as a significant percentage of species being accidental, with some differences between sampling methods (Table 4).
The parameters used in the ecological characterization of Razim Lake from the point of view of the ichthyofauna show that they fall into the moderate class, the majority of the indicators having moderate and good values, but according to the “one out, all out” principle there are some indicators in the moderate state class, which makes us assert that Razim Lake has a Moderate ecological status in 2020 (Table 5 and 6).
The ecological status of fish species from Razim Lake and the adjacent area according to Moss et al. (2003) (Pi = presence of locally native piscivores, Abex = absence of non-native species, Altd = either an absence of locally piscivores or presence of introduced species).
EcT
T [°C]
Ar [km2]
Geo
C
EcS
Fc
Fb
P:Z
FcR
FbR
P:Z/R
17
10–25
<100
Peat
101–800
High
Pi + Abex
5–20
>1
Good
Pi + Abex
5–20
>1
1.4
Mod.
Pi or Abex
>20
0.5–1
Yes
68
Poor
Altd
>20
<0.5
Bad
Altd
<5
<0.5
EcT = ecotype number, T = temperature of warmest month, Ar = area, Geo = catchment geology, C = conductivity [µS· cm–²], EcS = ecological status, Fc = fish community, Fb = fish biomass [g · m–2], P:Z = Piscivores:zooplanktivoures (ratio by biomass), FcR = fish community of Razim Lake, FbR = fish biomass of Razim Lake [g · m–2], P:Z/R = Piscivores/zooplanktivoures (ratio by biomass) of Razim Lake; Mod. = moderate, Pi = presence of locally native piscivores, Abex = absence of non-native species, Altd = either an absence of locally piscivores or presence of introduced species.
Ecological status of Razim Lake and the adjacent area (according to WFD) using the “one out, all out” principle for fish biological parameters.
Parameter
NPUE (A)
BPUE (B)
Hs
E
Nordic gillnets (NG)
158.6
6843.6
1.955
0.564
Ecological status NG
Moderate
Good
Good
Moderate
Electrofishing (E) values
126
18853.5
2.320
0.774
Ecological status E
Moderate
Very Good
Very Good
Good
Seine (S) values
136.8
7249.5
2.082
0.695
Ecological status S
Moderate
Good
Good
Good
TOTAL
Moderate
Good
Good
Moderate
A = relative abundance, NPUE; B = relative biomass, BPUE; Hs = Shannon–Wiener Biodiversity Index; E = Evenness Index; by type of sampling methods; Nordic gillnets (NG) values [No. of individuals (or grams) per 100 m² of nets per night]; Electrofishing (E) values individuals or [g · h–1]; Seine (S) values [individuals (or grams) per haul].
Some large fish individuals like Sanderlucioperca, Silurusglanis, and Abramisbrama were rarely found during our sampling campaign in Razim Lake, probably due to legal and illegal overfishing. Extensive poaching with nylon and small mesh-size gillnets fishing is one of the most dangerous practices in reducing the quality and size of fish populations in the area. There is no precise estimate of the extent of poaching in Razim Lake since 1990, but it is believed that poaching is threatening all animals, especially fishes. Razim Lake, the largest lake of Romania has always been fascinating for studies of fish fauna, especially due to the contact of freshwater with the brackish water, which make it a “natural biological laboratory” of living fish population species, with a lot of hybrid individuals or subspecies. The diversity indices of Razim Lake and adjacent water bodies indicate a stable ecosystem, so a stable fish coenosis, with values of equitability (E) more than medium 0.5 for each sampling method. Shannon–Wiener Index values are increased, the boundaries are more than 1.955 with the maximum on the shorelines or canals from the reed band on the shoreline of the Lake (Fig. 2).
Comparative biodiversity indices between sampling methods in Razim Lake in 2020 (HS = Shannon–Wiener Index, Hmax = the maximal diversity, E = Evenness Indices.
https://binary.pensoft.net/fig/664673
Relative abundance and biomass. Relative abundance (CPUE) is dominated by bream species (especially white bream), roach, giebel carp, perch, bleak, rudd, and ziege, but for the majority of fish species, it has low values, with some differences between sampling methods (Fig. 3). Relative biomass (CPUE) was dominated by common carp, gibel carp, roach, white bream, ziege, perch, pike-perch, and rudd with some differences between sampling methods (Fig. 4).
Relative biomass (BPUE = Biomass catch per Unit Effort) in Razim Lake in 2020 (NG = Nordic gillnets, CG = commercial gillnets).
https://binary.pensoft.net/fig/664675
Physico-chemical parameters of water. Geographical coordinates in some sites and physico-chemical parameters of water are presented in Table 7. Sampled water body points had depth between 25 and 250 cm, transparency 20–35 cm, conductivity 369–1183 µS · cm–1, salinity did not exceed 0.5‰, dissolved oxygen 4.45–16.06 mg · L–1, and oxygen saturation 55.1%–174.6% (Table 7).
Geographical coordinates and physical-chemical parameters observed in some fishing points from Razim Lake and the adjacent area in summer 2020.
Site code
Geographical coordinates
T [°C]
WD [cm]
TR [cm]
Sal [‰]
C [µS · cm–1]
Ox [mg · L–1]
OxS [%]
Raz_iul_20_N1
44.90654°N, 028.86275°E
28.7
160
35
<0.5
495
8.58
112.4
Raz_iul_20_N2
44.90374°N, 028.86633°E
30.2
180
35
<0.5
492
9.01
121
Raz_iul_20_N3
44.89632°N, 028.86646°E
28.7
140
35
<0.5
495
8.58
112.4
Raz_iul_20_N4
44.86862°N, 028.88374°E
23.0
130
30
<0.5
505
8.01
92.7
Raz_iul_20_N5
44.85979°N, 028.89621°E
22.8
180
30
<0.5
508
8.18
94.5
Raz_iul_20_SN1-12
44.893994°N, 028.865412°E
23.0
150
30
<0.5
Raz_iul_20_Ave
44.898313°N, 028.871662°E
23.0
150
30
<0.5
Raz_iul_20_E1
44.88736°N, 028.83898°E
26.6
80
20
<0.5
1142
14.06
174.6
Raz_iul_20_E2
44.88985°N, 028.84497°E
25.4
110
20
<0.5
531
9.72
118.8
Raz_iul_20_E3
44.89308°N, 028.82632°E
28.3
110
20
<0.5
1183
13.85
173
Raz_aug_20_SN1-12
25.0
150
30
<0.5
Raz_aug_20_Ave
25.0
200
30
<0.5
Raz_aug_20_E1
44.89899°N, 029.09472°E
25.3
250
20
<0.5
398
6.58
80.1
Raz_aug_20_E1
44.89899°N, 029.09472°E
25.9
250
20
<0.5
369
6.08
75.3
Raz_aug_20_E2
44.86952°N, 029.09857°E
25.6
50
25
<0.5
388
8.07
99.5
Raz_aug_20_E3
44.85786°N, 029.11197°E
26.0
80
35
<0.5
426
8.93
110.8
Raz_aug_20_E4
44.84264°N, 029.09601°E
25.8
120
35
<0.5
388
8.65
107.8
Raz_aug_20_E5
44.82828°N, 029.07246°E
25.7
130
30
<0.5
466
10.8
124.4
Raz_aug_20_E6
44.85986°N, 029.04191°E
25.5
140
30
<0.5
435
8.96
110.1
Raz_aug_20_E7
44.88725°N, 029.03616°E
25.7
90
35
<0.5
440
11.6
143.3
Raz_DrMus_aug_20_E1
44.90084°N, 029.03267°E
26.7
110
25
<0.5
438
11.8
147.7
Raz_Est_aug_20_E2
44.91323°N, 029.03304°E
25.8
90
25
<0.5
443
10.15
124.1
Raz_Duna_aug_20_E3
44.94065°N, 029.03714°E
26.1
25
25
<0.5
383
6.53
81.5
Raz_GoFu_aug_20_E4
44.94658°N, 029.05917°E
26.3
45
25
<0.5
445
12.81
159.2
Raz_GoFu_aug_20_E5
44.96377°N, 029.09998°E
26.9
80
20
<0.5
426
10.74
134.4
Raz_GoFu_aug_20_E6
44.98711°N, 029.09542°E
26.6
50
35
<0.5
431
9.1
113.6
Raz_Peri_aug_20_E1
44.78973°N, 029.13181°E
27.0
40
25
<0.5
424
10
126
Raz_Peri_aug_20_E2
44.80348°N, 029.13816°E
26.5
40
25
<0.5
394
10.33
130
Raz_Peri_aug_20_E3
44.83177°N, 029.1365°E
26.1
80
25
<0.5
381
4.45
55.1
T = water temperature, WD = water depth, Tr = transparency, Sal = salinity, C = conductivity, Ox = oxygen content, OxS = oxygen saturation (%).
Discussion
Since the 19th century, when Grigore Antipa drew attention to the decline in fish production in Razim Lake, reaching less than 1/3 of what it was 15 years before his studies (Antipa 1894), the trend in 2020 remains the same, mainly due to legal and illegal overexploitation, even with the appearance (1895 first fishing permit) and periodic updating of fishing laws. Even at the beginning of the 21st century, contravention of the fishing laws is usually not considered a serious offence in courts of law. In the past, the marine species entering Razim Lake in significant quantities were: blunt-snouted mullet, Mullusponticus Essipov, 1927; Volga pikeperch, Sandervolgensis (Gmelin, 1789); European flounder Platichthysflesus (Linnaeus, 1758); Black Sea turbot, Scophthalmusmaeoticus (Pallas, 1814); beluga, Husohuso (Linnaeus, 1758); Danube sturgeon, Acipensergueldenstaedtii Brandt et Ratzeburg, 1833; starry sturgeon, Acipenserstellatus Pallas, 1771; fringebarbel sturgeon, Acipensernudiventris Lovetsky, 1828 (which is currently an extinct species in the Danube delta); garfish, Belonebelone (Linnaeus, 1760); big-scale sand smelt, Atherinaboyeri Risso, 1810; Mediterranean sand smelt, Atherinahepsetus Linnaeus, 1758; Chelonauratus; leaping mullet, Chelonsaliens Risso, 1810; flathead grey mullet, Mugilcephalus Linnaeus, 1758; black goby, Gobiusniger Linnaeus, 1758; knout goby, Mesogobiusbatrachocephalus (Pallas, 1814); Alosaimmaculata; Black Sea shad, Alosatanaica (Grimm, 1901); Atlantic mackerel, Scomberscombrus Linnaeus, 1758; bluefish, Pomatomussaltatrix (Linnaeus, 1766); Anguillaanguilla; and European anchovy, Engraulisencrasicolus (Linnaeus, 1758) (Antipa 1894; Leonte et al. 1960; Otel et al. 1992, 1993; Staras, unpublished), but succession of species happens due to changes in water salinity. Namely, in 2020, only rare, accidental entry of Alosaimmaculata, Anguillaanguilla and some mullets species was observed, with higher presence of Alosatanaica, Atherinaboyeri and freshwater species. Historic data (Leonte 1969 cited by Staras, unpublished) cite around 55 fish species, a considerable number being marine and euryhaline. In 2020, 43 fish species were described in Razim Lake, with 39 native and four non-native (Perccottusglenii; Hypophthalmichthysmolitrix; Ctenopharyngodonidella; and Lepomisgibbosus), compared to 44 fish species with seven non-native species—Percarinademidoffi; Hypophthalmichthysmolitrix; Ctenopharyngodonidella; Lepomisgibbosus; stone moroko, Pseudorasboraparva (Temminck et Schlegel, 1846); black carp, Mylopharyngodonpiceus (Richardson, 1846); and bighead carp, Hypophthalmichthysnobilis (Richardson, 1845)—found by Otel et al. (1993) and Staras (unpublished) in the Razim–Sinoie Lake complex in the 1990s. Carassiusgibelio and Cyprinuscarpio are given as native species from Central Europe to Siberia (Kottelat and Freyhof 2007; Otel 2019). The current living conditions favor the development of freshwater eutrophic species with less than 0.5‰ salinity, large variations in dissolved oxygen and increased quantities of nutrients in water. A new non-native fish species was recently recorded in the natural environment of the Lower Danube River Basin, Perccottusglenii, first recorded in the Romanian River Suceava (Nalbant et al. 2004). It was first recorded in DDBR by Năstase (2007). Its range has expanded to Razim Lake, being first recorded in 2016 in Holbina Gulf of Razim Lake (Năstase et al. 2019a). Its population has increased in the Danube Delta (Năstase et al. 2019b) also in the Razim–Sinoie Lake complex, having a strong invasive behavior (Vilizzi et al. 2021), well adapted to new biotope conditions in Razim Lake. Qualitative and quantitative decreases in species numbers and abundance is undesirable throughout the DDBR, not only for Razim Lake. For that reason, the absence of Percarinademidoffi is worrying, as well as the reduction in the number of goby species (Ponticolasyrman, Neogobiusmelanostomus). Future studies and new actions to avoid their population collapse are necessary, in conditions of habitat change. Species, such as Anguillaanguilla; Acipenserstellatus; three-spined stickleback, Gasterosteusaculeatus Linnaeus, 1758; golden grey mullet, Chelonauratus (Risso, 1810); Platichthysflesus; schraetzer, Gymnocephalusschraetser (Linnaeus, 1758); and white-finned gudgeon, Romanogobioalbipinnatus (Lukasch, 1933) were present in the Razim–Sinoie Lake complex in the 1990s (Otel et al. 1992, 1993; Staras, unpublished), some of them in considerable quantities. However, in 2020, only a few species in Razim Lake are migratory, reophilous or reofilous–stagnofilous, such as Alosaimmaculata, Anguillaanguilla, and Ballerussapa, which occur rarely in the Lake and the majority are stagnofilous–reophilous or limnophilous species.
Conclusions
The main species (eudominant, very frequent) in Razim Lake and adjacent waters were white bream, Bliccabjoerkna; roach, Rutilusrutilus; and bleak, Alburnusalburnus, but mostly are accessory, also a significant percentage of species being accidental, with some differences between sampling methods. Relative abundance (CPUE) was dominated by bream species (especially white bream), roach, gibel carp, perch, bleak, rudd, and ziege with low values for the majority of fish species, but relative biomass (BPUE) is dominated by common carp, gibel carp, roach, white bream, ziege, perch, pike-perch, and rudd with some differences between sampling methods. The diversity indices of Razim Lake and the adjacent area point to a more than medium stable fish coenosis, with the most stable being the shoreline area. The parameters used (according to Moss et al. 2003) and four selected ecological parameters used according to the WFD) in the ecological status characterization of Razim Lake from the point of view of the fish fauna, categorise Razim Lake into the moderate class, using the “one out, all out” principle of the WFD. The ecological indicators have not completely captured a decreasing trend in commercial fishing. This aspect is studied for fisheries resources using stock estimations from fishery landings. However, the absence of large fish (pike-perch, wells catfish, common bream) is a sign of overfishing, especially when adult individuals are missing or an insignificant number is spawning, that could have negative repercussions on future generations, such as for pike-perch). The investigation of Razim Lake has always been a challenge for researchers and this paper aims to be a benchmark for future fish ecological studies. From another perspective, monitoring of fish fauna from Razim Lake is vital because it represents the main reservoir of some commercial fish species like pike-perch, common bream, common carp, but also for some important ecological species, such as Percarinademidoffi, Ponticolasyrman, and Umbrakrameri, as well as to adjust ecological parameters as support for the determination of conservation status.
Acknowledgment
This research was funded by the Romanian Government through the “Danube Delta” Nucleus Programme 2019–2022. Our thanks to Dr Otel Vasile and Dr Staras Mircea for their scientific advice, many thanks to Katarina Tosic helping us in English translation, also thanks to the Danube Delta National Institute for Research and Development and its scientists, technicians, fishermen, and boat crew for their help in the fieldwork.
ReferencesAntipaG (1894) Lacul Razim. Starea actuală a pescăriei și mijloacele de îndreptare. Imprimeria statului, Bucureşti 1–15. [In Romanian]AntipaG (1909) 16, Bucureşti, Romania, 294 pp. [In Romanian]BănărescuP (1964) Editura Academiei Republicii Populare Române, Bucureşti, Romania, 962 pp. [In Romanian]BotnariucNVădineanuA (1982) Ecologie. Editura Didactică și pedagogică, Bucureşti, Romania, 359–418 (Anexele 1–12). [In Romanian]CărăusuS (1952) Editura Academiei Republicii Populare Române, Bucureşti, Romania, 802 pp. [In Romanian]DrigaBV (2004) Academia Română, Institutul de Geografie, Editura Casa Cărţii de Ştiinţă, Cluj-Napoca, Romania, 256 pp. [In Romanian]FrickeREschmeyerWNVan der LaanR (Eds) (2021) . [Accessed on 20 December 2022.]http://researcharchive.calacademy.org/research/ichthyology/catalog/fishcatmain.aspFroeseRPaulyD (Eds) (2021) Fish Base. [Version 06/2021] http://www.fishbase.orgGâştescuP (1971) Editura Academiei, Bucureşti, Romania, 372 pp. [In Romanian]GâştescuPŞtiucăR (2008) Editura CD Press, Bucureşti, Romania, 400 pp. [In Romanian]GomoiuMTSkolkaM (2001) Metodologii pentru studii ecologice, Ovidius University Press, Constanţa, Romania, 175 pp. [In Romanian]IbramOTudorIMCioacăETeodorofLNăstaseATudorMCernișencuI (2015) Editura Centrul de Informare Tehnologică Delta Dunării, Tulcea, Romania, 143 pp. [In Romanian]KottelatM (1997) Biologia 52, Suppl. 5, 271 pp.KottelatMFreyhofJ (2007) Cornol, Switzerland and Freyhof, Berlin, Germany, 646 pp.LeonteTRLeonteVMateiDSoileanuB (1956) Observații asupra complexului Razelm–Sinoe în perioada 1950–1952.1: 1–50. [In Romanian]LeonteTRPopescuLBănărescuPStoinaTMunteanuI (1960) Observații hidrobiologice-piscicole asupra complexului Razelm în perioada 1955–1956.2(5): 103–129. [In Romanian]MossBDStephenACBecaresEVanDe BWCollingsSEVanDEDe EytoEFeldmannTFernandez-AlaezCFernandez-AlaezMFrankenRJMGaria-CriadoFGrossEMGyllströmMHanssonLAIrvineKJarvaltAJensenJPJeppesenEKeiresaloTKornijowRKrauseTKünapHLaasALillELorensBOttHIPeczulaWPeetersETHMPhillipsGRomoSRussellVSalujõeJScefferMSiewersenKSmalHTeschCTimmHTuvikeneLTonnoIVirroTVicenteEWilsonD (2003) The determination of ecological status in shallow lakes—A tested system (ECOFRAME) for implementation of the European Water Framework Directive.13(6): 507–549. https://doi.org/10.1002/aqc.592MühlenbergM (1993) UTB für Wissenschaft 595, Quelle und Meyer, Heidelberg, Wiesbaden, Germany, 512 pp.NalbantTBattesKWPricopeFUrecheD (2004) First record of the sleeper Perccottusglenii (Pisces: Perciformes: Odontobutidae) in Romania.47: 279–284.NăstaseA (2007) First record of Amur sleeper Perccottusglenii (Perciformes, Odontobutidae) in the Danube Delta (Dobrogea, Romania).2: 167–174.NăstaseAOtelVNăvodaruI (2017) Ecological status of fish fauna in arms of the Danube Delta (Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, Romania) at the beginning of the third millennium.69(3): 349–360.NăstaseANăvodaruICernișencuIȚiganovG (2019a) The fish communities of lake-complexes from Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve (DDBR) in spring–summer and autumn of 2016.24: 63–76. https://doi.org/10.7427/DDI.24.07NăstaseACernișencuINăvodaruI (2019b) A decade (2007–2017) from first record of the invasion in Danube Delta (Romania) by the non-native Chinese sleeper (Perccottusglenii, Dybowsky [Sic] 1877) species in north of Balkan area.20(4): 1796–1805.NăstaseAIaniMHonțȘParaschivMCernișencuI (2021) Fish community from Lower Danube River arms.26: 47–68. https://doi.org/10.7427/DDI.26.05NăvodaruI (2008) Editura Dobrogea, Constanţa, Romania, 295 pp. [In Romanian]NăvodaruINăstaseA (2011) What fish and how many there are in Danube Delta lakes? Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute 17: 71–82.NelsonJS (2006) John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken NJ, USA, 601 pp.NybergPDegermanE (1988) Report of the Institute for Fresh-water Research, Drottningholm No. 7, 18 pp. [In Swedish with English summary]OdumEP (1975) Holt, Rinehart and Winston New York, NJ, USA, 244 pp.OtelV (2001) Actual status of ichthyofauna in the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve – Roumanian sector: Systematics and conservation. P. 61. The 10th European Congress of Ichthyology, ECI X: in the heart of Europe: Programme and book of abstracts. 3–7 September 2001, Prague, Czech Republic.OtelV (2007) Editura Centrul de Informare Tehnologică Delta Dunării, INCDDD, Tulcea, Romania, 481 pp. [In Romanian]OtelV (2019) Is Carassiusgibelio (Pisces, Cyprinidae) a native or non-native species in Romania? Scientific Annals of the Danube Delta Institute 24: 77–83. https://doi.org/10.7427/DDI.24.08OtelVBănărescuP (1986) First record of Percarinademidoffi Nordmann, 1840 from Romania and from the Danube River Basin (Pisces, Percidae).31(1): 11–13.OtelVBănărescuPNalbantTBacaluPCociaşŞ (1992) Investigaţii asupra ihtiofaunei dulcicole a Deltei Dunării în anul 1991.1: 141–152. [In Romanian]OtelVBănărescuPNalbantTBaboianuC (1993) Rezultatele investigaţiilor ihtiologice din teritoriul Rezervaţiei Biosferei Delta Dunării în anul 1992.2: 145–162. [In Romanian]SârbuIBenedekAM (2004) Editura Universitătii „Lucian Blaga”, Sibiu, Romania, 260 pp. [In Romanian]SchwerdtfegerF (1975) Ökologie der Tiere Band 3: Synökologie: Struktur, Funktion und Produktivität mehrartiger Tiergemeinschaften: Mit einem Anhang: Mensch und Tiergemeinschaft. Paul Parey Verlag. Hamburg, Berlin, Germany.SindrilariuPDBacalbaşa-DobroviciNFreyhofJWolterC (2002) The juvenile fish community of the Lower Danube and Danube Delta.34: 517–526.VilizziLCoppGHHillJEAdamovichBAislabieLAkinDAl-FaisalAJAlmeidaDAzmaiAMNBakiuRBellatiABernierRBiesJMBilgeGBrancoPBuiTDCanning-ClodeJRamosHACCastellanos-GalindoGACastroNChaichanaRChainhoPChanJCunicoAMCurdADangchanaPDashinovDDavisonPIde CamargoMPDoddJADurland DonahouALEdsmanLEkmekçiFGElphinstone-DavisJErősTEvangelistaCFenwickGFerinczAFerreiraTFeunteunEFilizHForneckSCGajduchenkoHSGama MonteiroJGestosoIGiannettoDGilles JrASGizziFGlamuzinaBGlamuzinaLGoldsmitJGollaschSGoulletquerPGrabowskaJHarmerRHaubrockPJHeDJeffreyWHeanJWHerczegGHowlandKLİlhanAInteresovaEJakubčinováKJelmertAJohnsenSIKakarekoTKanongdateKKilliNKimJEKırankayaSGKňazovickáDKopeckýOKostovVKoutsikosNKozicSKuljanishviliTKumarBKumarLKuritaYKurtulILazzaroLLeeLLehtiniemiMLeonardiGLeuvenRSEWLiSLipinskayaTLiuFLloydLLorenzoniMAlberto LunaSALyonsTJMagellanKMalmstrømMMarchiniAMarrSMMassonGMassonLMcKenzieCHMemedeminDMendozaRMinchinDMiossecLMoghaddasSDMoshobaneMCMumladzeLRahmat NaddafiRNajafi-MajdENăstaseANăvodaruINealJWNienhuisSNimtimMNolanETOcchipinti-AmbrogiAOjaveerHOleninSOlssonKOnikuraNO’ShaughnessyKPaganelliDPaola ParrettiPPatokaJPavia JrRTBPellitteri-RosaDPelletier-RousseauMElfritzsonMPeraltaEMPerdikarisCPietraszewskiDPiriaMPitoisSPompeiLPouletNPredaCPuntila-DoddRQashqaeiATRadočajTRahmaniHRajSReevesDRistovskaMRizevskyVRobertsonDRRobertsonPRuykysLSabaAOSantosJMSarıHMSeguradoPSemenchenkoVSenananWSimardNSimonovićPSkóraMESlovák ŠvolíkováKSmetiEŠmídováTŠpelićISrėbalienėGGianluca StasollaGStebbingPŠtevoveBSureshVRSzajbertBTaKATTarkanASTempestiJTherriaultTWTidburyHJTop-KarakuşNTricaricoETrocaDFATsiamisKTuckettQMTutmanPUyanUUzunovaEVardakasLVelleGVerreyckenHVintsekLWeiHWeiperthAWeylOLFWinterERWłodarczykRWoodLEYangRYapıcıSShayneSBYeoSSBYoğurtçuoğluBYunnieALEYunjie ZhUYZiębaGŽitňanováKClarkeS (2021) A global-scale screening of non-native aquatic organisms to identify potentially invasive species under current and future climate conditions. Science of the Total Environment 788: 147868. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147868
Staras M (1995) Studiul populaţiilor piscicole din complexul de lacuri Razim–Sinoie şi elaborarea strategiei de pescuit.[Study of the fish populations in the Razim-Sinoie lake complex and elaboration of the fishing strategy.] PhD thesis, University Dunărea de Jos, Galaţi, Romania. [In Romanian]
Năstase A (2009) Cercetări asupra diversităţii ihtiofaunei din Delta Dunării pentru exploatarea durabilă a resurselor piscicole. [Researches of ichthyofauna diversity in the Danube Delta for sustainable management of fish resources.] PhD thesis, University Dunărea de Jos, Galaţi, Romania. [In Romanian]