Arroyo Canal Candelaria: biodiversidad y condición ecológica en un paisaje agrícola
Arroyo Canal Candelaria: biodiversity and ecological condition in an agricultural landscape
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47069/estudios-ambientales.v14i1.3269Palabras clave:
arroyos canalizados, enfoque multitaxa, gradientes longitudinales, ecosistemas novedosos, bioindicadores bentónicos, channelized streams, multi-taxa approach, longitudinal gradients, novel ecosystems, benthic bioindicatorsResumen
Los sistemas de drenaje y canalización constituyen una parte significativa de la red hidrográfica en paisajes agrícolas de llanura, aunque su rol ecológico ha sido históricamente subestimado. En este trabajo se presenta un estudio de caso del Arroyo Canal Candelaria, sur de Santa Fe, Argentina, con el objetivo de caracterizar patrones espaciales de biodiversidad y condición ecológica en un sistema altamente modificado.
Se integró información de macroinvertebrados bentónicos, herpetofauna, aves y mamíferos medianos y grandes, relevados en seis sitios distribuidos en cuenca alta, media y baja entre 2023 y 2025. Se analizaron patrones de riqueza taxonómica y se utilizaron índices bióticos bentónicos como indicadores indirectos de la condición ecológica acuática.
Los resultados mostraron un incremento general de la riqueza hacia los tramos inferiores y una mejora relativa de los indicadores biológicos bentónicos, aunque con predominio de organismos tolerantes en gran parte del sistema. La coincidencia en la dirección de estos patrones entre distintos grupos biológicos sugiere la presencia de una tendencia longitudinal consistente.
En conjunto, los resultados sugieren que, a pesar de su canalización y del alto grado de presión antrópica, el Arroyo Canal Candelaria mantiene atributos ecológicos relevantes y podría contribuir a la conectividad biológica dentro del paisaje. Estos resultados destacan la importancia de considerar a los sistemas arroyo-canal dentro de estrategias de diagnóstico, gestión y restauración ecológica en ambientes altamente transformados.
Abstract
Artificial drainage and channelized systems constitute a substantial component of hydrological networks in lowland agricultural landscapes, although their ecological role has historically been underestimated. This case study examines the Arroyo Canal Candelaria, southern Santa Fe, Argentina to characterize spatial patterns of biodiversity and ecological condition in a highly modified system.
Data on benthic macroinvertebrates, herpetofauna, birds, and medium- to large-sized mammals were compiled from six sampling sites distributed across upper, middle, and lower sections of the basin between 2023 and 2025. Taxonomic richness patterns were assessed, and benthic biotic indices were used as indirect indicators of aquatic ecological condition.
The results indicate a general increase in richness toward downstream sections, along with a relative improvement in benthic biotic indices, although tolerant taxa dominated throughout much of the system. The consistency of these patterns across different biological groups suggests a consistent longitudinal trend.
Overall, the findings indicate that, despite its channelization and high level of anthropogenic pressure, Arroyo Canal Candelaria retains significant ecological attributes and could contribute to ecological connectivity within the landscape. These results highlight the importance of considering channelized stream systems in ecological assessment, management, and restoration strategies in highly transformed environments.
Citas
Alba-Tercedor, J., & Sánchez-Ortega, A. (1988). Un método rápido y simple para evaluar la calidad biológica de las aguas corrientes basado en el de Hellawell (1978). Limnetica, 4, 51–56.
Allan, J. D. (2004). Landscapes and riverscapes: The influence of land use on stream ecosystems. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 35, 257–284. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.35.120202.110122
Allan, J. D., & Castillo, M. M. (2007). Stream ecology: Structure and function of running waters (2nd ed.). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5583-6
Armitage, P. D., Moss, D., Wright, J. F., & Furse, M. T. (1983). The performance of a new biological water quality score system based on macroinvertebrates over a wide range of unpolluted running-water sites. Water Research, 17(3), 333–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1354(83)90188-4
Bernhardt, E. S., & Palmer, M. A. (2011). River restoration: The fuzzy logic of repairing reaches to reverse catchment scale degradation. Ecological Applications, 21(6), 1926–1931. https://doi.org/10.1890/10-1574.1
Biasatti, N. R. (Comp.). (2015). Las ecorregiones: su conservación y las áreas naturales protegidas de la provincia de Santa Fe. Secretaría de Estado de Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo Sustentable.
Biasatti, N. R., & Rimoldi, P. G. (2022). Paradojas de la conservación de biodiversidad en los agroecosistemas pampeanos: La fragmentación inversa. Studies in Environmental and Animal Sciences, 3(3), 1582–1589. https://doi.org/10.54020/seasv3n3-021
Biasatti, N. R., & Rimoldi, P. G. (2025). Biodiversidad: Alternativas para su conservación en ecosistemas severamente antropizados: La fragmentación inversa. Laborde Libros Editor.
Birk, S., Bonne, W., Borja, Á., Brucet, S., Courrat, A., Poikane, S., Solimini, A. G., van de Bund, W., Zampoukas, N., & Hering, D. (2012). Three hundred ways to assess Europe’s surface waters: An almost complete overview of biological methods to implement the Water Framework Directive. Ecological Indicators, 18, 31–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.10.009
Davidson, N. C. (2014). How much wetland has the world lost? Long-term and recent trends in global wetland area. Marine and Freshwater Research, 65(10), 934–941. https://doi.org/10.1071/MF14173
Dodds, W. K., & Oakes, R. M. (2008). Headwater influences on downstream water quality. Environmental Management, 41, 367–377. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-007-9033-y
Domínguez, E., & Fernández, H. R. (2009). Macroinvertebrados bentónicos sudamericanos: Sistemática y biología. Fundación Miguel Lillo. https://lillo.org.ar
Dudgeon, D., Arthington, A. H., Gessner, M. O., Kawabata, Z. I., Knowler, D. J., Lévêque, C., Naiman, R. J., Prieur-Richard, A. H., Soto, D., Stiassny, M. L. J., & Sullivan, C. A. (2006). Freshwater biodiversity: Importance, threats and conservation challenges. Biological Reviews, 81(2), 163–182. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1464793105006950
Dudgeon, D., Arthington, A. H., Gessner, M. O., Kawabata, Z. I., Knowler, D. J., Lévêque, C., … Sullivan, C. A. (2019). Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges. Biological Reviews, 94(3), 849–873. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12480
Foley, J. A., DeFries, R., Asner, G. P., Barford, C., Bonan, G., Carpenter, S. R., Chapin, F. S., Coe, M. T., Daily, G. C., Gibbs, H. K., et al. (2005). Global consequences of land use. Science, 309(5734), 570–574. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1111772
Grill, G., Lehner, B., Thieme, M., Geenen, B., Tickner, D., Antonelli, F., Babu, S., Cheng, L., Crochetiere, H., Macedo, H. E., et al. (2019). Mapping the world’s free-flowing rivers. Nature, 569, 215–221. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1111-9
Heino, J. (2010). Are indicator groups and cross-taxon congruence useful for predicting biodiversity in aquatic ecosystems? Ecological Indicators, 10(2), 112–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2009.04.013
Heyer, W. R., Donnelly, M. A., McDiarmid, R. W., Hayek, L. A. C., & Foster, M. S. (Eds.). (1994). Measuring and monitoring biological diversity: Standard methods for amphibians. Smithsonian Institution Press.
Hilsenhoff, W. L. (1988). Rapid field assessment of organic pollution with a family-level biotic index. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 7(1), 65–68. https://doi.org/10.2307/1467832
Hobbs, R. J., Higgs, E., & Harris, J. A. (2009). Novel ecosystems: Implications for conservation and restoration. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 24(11), 599–605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2009.05.012
Johnson, D. H. (2008). In defense of indices: The case of bird surveys. Journal of Wildlife Management, 72(4), 857–868. https://doi.org/10.2193/2007-294
Mazerolle, M. J., Bailey, L. L., Kendall, W. L., Royle, J. A., Converse, S. J., & Nichols, J. D. (2007). Making great leaps forward: Accounting for detectability in herpetological field studies. Journal of Herpetology, 41(4), 672–689. https://doi.org/10.1670/07-061.1
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. (2005). Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Wetlands and Water Synthesis. World Resources Institute.
Mitsch, W. J., & Gosselink, J. G. (2015). Wetlands (5th ed.). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118676820
Morse, C. C., Huryn, A. D., & Cronan, C. (2014). Impervious surface area as a predictor of the effects of urbanization on stream insect communities. BioScience, 64(9), 832–842. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biu086
Naiman, R. J., Décamps, H., & Pollock, M. (1993). The role of riparian corridors in maintaining regional biodiversity. BioScience, 43(8), 564–576. https://doi.org/10.2307/1311947 Ralph, C. J., Sauer, J. R., & Droege, S. (Eds.). (1995). Monitoring bird populations by point counts (General Technical Report PSW-GTR-149). USDA Forest Service. https://doi.org/10.2737/PSW-GTR-149
Reid, A. J., Carlson, A. K., Creed, I. F., Eliason, E. J., Gell, P. A., Johnson, P. T. J., Kidd, K. A., MacCormack, T. J., Olden, J. D., Ormerod, S. J., Smol, J. P., Taylor, W. W., Tockner, K., Vermaire, J. C., Dudgeon, D., & Cooke, S. J. (2019). Emerging threats and persistent conservation challenges for freshwater biodiversity. Biological Reviews, 94(3), 849–873. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12480
Rimoldi, P. G. (2015). Diversidad y patrones de distribución de los mamíferos silvestres medianos y grandes de la cuenca del río Carcarañá (provincia de Santa Fe). Mastozoología Neotropical, 22(1), 201–210. https://www.sarem.org.ar/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/MN_221_Rimoldi.pdf
Rimoldi, P. G., & Chimento, N. R. (2018). Diversidad de mamíferos nativos medianos y grandes en la cuenca del río Carcarañá, provincia de Santa Fe (Argentina). Revista del Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales, Nueva Serie, 20(2), 333–341. https://revista.macn.gob.ar/ojs/index.php/RevMus/article/view/612
Rodríguez Capítulo, A., Tangorra, M., & Ocón, C. (2003). Use of benthic macroinvertebrates to assess the biological status of Pampean streams in Argentina. Aquatic Ecology, 37, 109–119. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023966603653
Soininen, J., Heino, J., & Wang, J. (2015). A meta analysis of nestedness and turnover components of beta diversity across organisms and ecosystems. Ecography, 38(12), 121–129. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecog.00977
Thalmeier, M. B., & Brunetto, E. (2026). Caracterización geomorfológica del Arroyo Canal Candelaria (ACC), Pampa Norte. En P. G. Rimoldi (Ed.), Caracterización del Arroyo Canal Candelaria: contexto, tensiones y perspectivas (pp. 31–54). Laborde Libros Editor.
Tockner, K., Ward, J. V., Arscott, D. B., Edwards, P. J., Kollmann, J., Gurnell, A. M., Petts, G. E., & Maiolini, B. (2003). The Tagliamento River: A model ecosystem of European importance. Aquatic Sciences, 65(3), 239–253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00027-003-0699-9
Tonkin, J. D., Altermatt, F., Finn, D. S., Heino, J., Olden, J. D., Pauls, S. U., & Lytle, D. A. (2018). The role of dispersal in river network metacommunities. Freshwater Biology, 63(1), 141–163. https://doi.org/10.1111/fwb.13016
Viglizzo, E. F., Frank, F. C., Carreño, L. V., Jobbágy, E. G., Pereyra, H., Clatt, J., Pincén, D., & Ricard, M. F. (2011). Ecological and environmental footprint of 50 years of agricultural expansion in Argentina. Global Change Biology, 17, 959–973. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2010.02293
Walsh, C. J., Roy, A. H., Feminella, J. W., Cottingham, P. D., Groffman, P. M., & Morgan, R. P. (2005). The urban stream syndrome: Current knowledge and the search for a cure. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 24(3), 706–723. https://doi.org/10.1899/04028.1
Wohl, E., Lane, S. N., & Wilcox, A. C. (2015). The science and practice of river restoration. BioScience, 65(2), 182–193. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biu235
Zedler, J. B., & Kercher, S. (2005). Wetland resources: Status, trends, ecosystem services, and restorability. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 30, 39–74. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.30.050504.144248
