Next Article in Journal
A Review of Community-Based Strategies for Addressing Bush Encroachment in the Semi-Arid Savannah Rangelands of Southern Africa
Previous Article in Journal
Proposing Dimensions of an Agroecological Fishery: The Case of a Small-Scale Indigenous-Led Fishery Within Northwest Territories, Canada
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Conservation
Volume 5
Issue 1
10.3390/conservation5010014
conservation-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Biodiversity Conservation and Survival Factors of Charophyte Algal Communities in Protected High-Mountain Lakes of Kaçkar Mountains National Park (Rize, Turkey)

by
Bülent Şahin
1 and
Sophia Barinova
2,*
1
Department of Biology Education, Fatih Education Faculty, Trabzon University, 61335 Trabzon, Turkey
2
Institute of Evolution, University of Haifa, Mount Carmel, 199 Abba Khoushi Ave., Haifa 3498838, Israel
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Conservation 2025, 5(1), 14; https://doi.org/10.3390/conservation5010014
Submission received: 27 November 2024 / Revised: 28 January 2025 / Accepted: 4 March 2025 / Published: 6 March 2025
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The composition and diversity of the sensitive benthic Charophyta were examined in 13 lakes and 1 pond located in the Kaçkar Mountains National Park during the summer and autumn months of 2020. While a total of 78 taxa were identified, Cosmarium became the main genus of the flora with 33 species. In the flora, the filamentous members of the Charophyta (12 species) were also noteworthy. Intraspecies variability is very high, with a Subspecies/Species index of 1.11, which reflects the sensitivity of the identified charophyte flora as an indicator of conservation efficiency. The physico-chemical analysis results and bioindicator species indicate that the investigated waters are fresh, with low salinity and a circumneutral or slightly alkaline pH, and are not organically polluted. Comparative statistics and RDA divide the studied lakes into two clusters (northern and southern in the park territory) and reveal the complex factors related to salinity and oxygen saturation as regulators of species abundance in communities.

1. Introduction

The European Water Framework Directive (2000/6) takes into account the biological and ecological values of freshwater ecosystems and promotes the sustainable use and conservation of these resources. This directive has led scientists and government institutions to work more carefully to protect these ecosystems [1].
High-mountain lakes are important aquatic ecosystems that formed during the glacial period and have survived to the present day. These lakes have a unique biodiversity adapted to extreme environmental conditions such as low temperatures, low nutrients, short growing seasons, high radiation, snow, and ice. However, some local and global impacts such as road construction, acid rain, toxic air pollutants, and climate change cause high-mountain lakes to become fragile and affected by species loss [2,3,4,5,6]. Studies to determine the biodiversity of these ecosystems are therefore very important.
One of the groups of algae used in the ecological assessment of freshwater ecosystems is desmids. This is due to their status as bioindicators, which are organisms that are able to indicate the quality of their environment. Firstly, they exhibit a narrow ecological range. It is established that desmids typically inhabit freshwater environments with low nutrient concentrations and low conductivity, which are characteristically acidic [7,8]. Secondly, desmids demonstrate a capacity to respond to environmental change. The diversity of desmid species increases in response to improvements in water quality with the emergence of new species as water conditions change. Furthermore, the identification of desmid species is relatively straightforward, as the species possess distinctive shapes and ornaments that are typically discernible under a light microscope. Additionally, comprehensive identification keys for desmids are readily available [9].
The Eastern Black Sea Region is one of the richest biodiverse geographical regions in Turkey. Previous studies in the region, which is home to 685 glacial lakes, have revealed the existence of a particularly diverse range of desmids [10,11,12].
This is the first study of the Charophyta flora in the high-mountain lakes of the Kaçkar Mountains National Park. The objective of this study is to ascertain the benthic Charophyta flora and the physico-chemical characteristics of the 13 lakes and 1 pond within the Kaçkar Mountains National Park, and to investigate the correlation between their diversity and environmental variables for determining the indicators that reflect the sensitivity of the identified flora of charophytes to the efficiency of conservation.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

Kaçkar Mountains National Park, which was declared a national park in 1994, is located in the Eastern Black Sea region of Turkey, in the Eastern Black Sea Mountains. The park is situated between latitudes 40°57′49″–40°42′10″ N and longitudes 41°14′45″–40°51′27″ E, encompassing an area of 51,550 hectares (Figure 1) [13].
The park is predominantly composed of granitic and volcanic rocks that span a range of ages from the Late Cretaceous to the Eocene [15]. The area is composed of granodiorite and Cretaceous flysch, with intermittent occurrences of Neogene deposits. These structures emerged on the surface as a result of mountain formation processes that occurred during the Paleozoic (I period) and Cretaceous (III period) periods [13]. It is one of the few areas in Turkey where glaciation was observed during the Pleistocene and where active glaciation still exists. In addition, this region has many glaciers, glacial lakes, glacial valleys, cirques, and moraines [16]. The region is affected by the Eastern Black Sea climate, which is cool during summers, mild in winters, and rainy throughout the year [17]. In the lower parts of the Kaçkar Mountains National Park, such as around the Ayder Plateau, winter temperatures range from 0 to 4 °C. Meanwhile, spring and autumn months experience a rapid change, with temperatures rising above 18 °C in summer. Above 3000 m, winter temperatures drop to −6 °C, while summer temperatures range from 6 to 9 °C. The park receives over 2000 mm of average annual precipitation [13]. The park contains four main soil groups (high-mountain-meadow soils, limeless brown forest soil, red-yellow soils, and gray-brown soils) and also 100 glacial lakes [13]. The park area is located in the Colchis section of the Euro-Siberian floristic region and is home to many endemic species such as Papaver lateritium, Barbarea trichopoda, Cochleria sintenisii, Sempervivum furseorum, Centaurea appendicigera, and Alopecurus laguroides [13,18]. Additionally, it is one of the three routes that are important for bird migration [19].

2.2. Sampling and Laboratory Studies

Samples of epiphytic, epilitic, and epipelic algae were collected from 13 lakes and 1 pond in the Kaçkar Mountains National Park on 19 July, 28 August, and 10 September 2020 (Table 1), because the summer months are the best time to reach high-mountain lakes. In addition, temperature and light contribute greatly to the development of the algal flora. Studied lakes can be divided into three groups based on their location within the park: south group (KPL-1-5, AL-1, VKL), middle group (ML, TSL-1-2), and north group (KRDL, KVL, BDL, AP). Epipelic samples were collected from the sediment surface of all waters using a 1 m long and 0.8 cm diameter glass pipe. Epilithic samples were obtained from TSL-1, 2, BDL, and KVL by scraping randomly chosen stones with a toothbrush and washing into plastic bottles. Epiphytic algae samples were obtained by squeezing out from the macrophyte plants (Potamogeton sp. and Juncus sp.) in KVL and AP [20,21]. The samples were then placed in 100 mL plastic bottles and fixed with 4% formaldehyde.
Water temperature, dissolved oxygen, conductivity, and pH were measured using Thermo Orion-4-Star pH (Hampton, NH, USA, Marshall Scientific) and YSI-55 (Letchworth, Hertfordshire, UK, Xylem Analytics) portable meters in the field. Members of the Charophyta were examined and photographed in the lab using a Leica DM 2500 light microscope and Leica DFC 290 camera (Wetzlar, Germany, Leica Microsystems). Other chemical analyses of the water were carried out in the DSI General Directorate Laboratories DSI 22nd Regional Directorate Quality Control and Laboratory Branch Office.
To identify the Charophyta species, relevant books and articles were consulted [22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51]. The species names were verified using AlgaeBase [52].
Algae taxa frequencies were determined using a scale based on the number of lakes studied in the Kaçkar Mountains Natural Park. Very rare (VR): taxa recorded in 1–20% of investigated lakes; rare (R): taxa recorded in 21–40% of investigated lakes; common (C): taxa recorded in 41–60% of investigated lakes; frequent (F): taxa recorded in 61–80% of investigated lakes; very frequent (VF): taxa recorded in 81–100% of investigated lakes [53].
The ecological preferences of the identified species were determined for the purpose of bioindication of nine environmental variables [54,55]. The classes of water quality indicators were grouped based on the range of species-specific index saprobity S: Class 1, S = 0.0–0.5; Class 2, S = 0.5–1.5; Class 3, S = 1.5–2.5; and Class 4, S = 2.5–3.5 [54]. The positioning of the indicator groups for each environmental variable on the histogram was determined in accordance with the strength of the variable in question.
The BioDiversity Pro 9.0 program was used for similarity analysis and uniqueness species number calculation [56]. The network plot in JASP (Jeffrey’s Amazing Statistics Program 0.19.1.0) on the botnet package of Statistics with R [57] was conducted for the correlation analysis of species content. Redundancy discriminant analysis (RDA) was performed using the CANOCO (Version 4.5) program to calculate the relationships between biologically dominant species and environmental variables [58].

3. Results

3.1. Physical and Chemical Properties of Waters

The lakes’ water temperature, pH, and dissolved oxygen values were determined to be between 7.1 and 22.5 °C, 6.10 and 8.21, and 8.02 and 9.17 mg L−1, respectively. The range of total dissolved solids was found to be between 9.92 and 44.27 mg L−1, while the electrical conductivity values ranged from 14.1 to 71.4 μS cm−1. The total hardness of the samples was found to range from 17.59 to 38.84 mg L−1 in samples KPL-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, BDL, and ML. The amount of nitrate that could not be detected in the waters of KPL-1, VKL, and KVL was detected in the range of 0.207–0.575 mg L−1 in other lakes. The concentration of nitrite was found to be 0.020 mg L−1 in ML and TSL-1, while the concentration of phosphate was only 0.113 mg L−1 in KPL-5. Other results of the chemical analysis are given in Supplementary Table S1.

3.2. Floristic Composition and Diversity of Charophyta

This research yielded a total of 78 species and intraspecific taxa of Charophyta, distributed across 1 class, 2 orders, 5 families, and 13 genera. While the order Zygnematales represents a relatively minor component of the desmid flora (16 species, 20.51%), the order Desmidiales constituted the foundation for the species richness of the flora (62 species, 79.49%). The most prevalent families were Desmidiaceae (52 species), Zygnemataceae (12 species), and Closteriaceae (9 species). Additionally, the families Mesotaeniaceae and Peniaceae were represented by a single and four species, respectively. The majority of the benthic Charophyta flora was constituted by the genus Cosmarium (33 species, 42.30%). This was followed by the genera Closterium (nine species), Euastrum (eight species), Spirogyra (seven species), and Staurastrum (six species). The remaining genera were represented by a single or a maximum of three species (see Supplementary Tables S2 and S3, and Figures S1–S7). The initial three genera encompass 50 species, a figure that exceeds the standard deviation value (8.97) (Figure 2). Eight desmids were identified as new records for the freshwater algal flora of Turkey. These species are indicated by an asterisk (*) in Supplementary Table S2. The taxonomic and ecological characteristics of the newly recorded species are presented in separate publications [59,60].
Only one desmid species (1.28%) (Staurastrum punctulatum) has been found in more than 60% of the investigated lakes (F), whereas 96.15% have been found in less than 40% (VR, R) of the investigated lakes. Cosmarium subcostatum and Penium margaritaceum were represented in more than 40% of the studied lakes (C). Some Charophyta species were identified only in one lake. The number of them is 52, and they represent 66.66% of all the flora (Supplementary Table S2).
When comparing the benthic charophyte floras of the studied lakes, species diversity and relative abundance were found to be different. In particular, the composition of epipelic charophyte species (57 species, 73.07%) was identified to be more diverse than that of epilithic and epiphytic species (Supplementary Table S2). The calculation of the number of unique species for each studied lake (Figure 3) shows the absence of fluctuations, which means that the species composition of all studied lakes belongs to the same flora, but the species richness is regulated by environmental variables. At the same time, the calculation of intraspecies variability is very high, with a Subspecies/Species index of 1.11, which reflects the sensitivity of the revealed charophyte flora.
The next step in the analysis of the revealed diversity of charophyte algae was a comparison of their species composition and abundance in the lakes. Figure 4 shows only one cluster with a similarity of more than 50% for most lakes, while the other four floras are not included in it and do not form their own cluster. This emphasizes, on the one hand, that the studied species composition of the lakes belongs to a single flora, and on the other hand, the high individuality of some floras (KPL-4, AL-1, VKL, KVL).
Figure 5 represents a JASP Network plot showing the correlation between charophyte abundance and total species richness. Only two clusters can be recognized. Cluster 1 combines species from the south group of lakes, while cluster 2 includes all lakes from the middle and north groups and one lake KPL-1 from the south group. It can be related to the geographical position of the lakes that influenced the species’ diversity and abundance.

3.3. Bioindicators

The distribution of each group of indicators is shown in Figure 6 and Figure 7. Benthic species dominated the samples examined. Plankto-benthic species were also observed (Figure 6a). In relation to oxygenation, water velocity, and oxygen saturation, three ecological groups of Charophyta species were found. Species characteristics for aerophiles were dominant (Figure 6b) in the lakes investigated. The pH bioindication results show that acidophiles (34 species, 53.96%) are abundant in the Kaçkar Mountains National Park. They were followed by indifferents (24 species, 38.09%) and alkaliphiles (4 species, 6.34%) (Figure 6c). In addition, alkalibionte species were also found in AP (Supplementary Table S2). Overall, the indicator groups consisting of acidophiles and indifferents accounted for 92.05% of the indicator species in each lake community (Figure 6c). Salinity is an important component of the total ionic content of the water and influences the algal community. Bioindication based on water salinity shows that the “oligohalobes-indifferent” group dominates in all the studied lakes. The other group was halophobes (Figure 6d).
The ecological preferences of the species detected in this study can provide information on the habitat conditions of high-mountain lakes such as the lakes under study. Mesotrophic species (32 species) represent 61.53% of the total flora and dominate the desmid communities of the studied lakes. They are followed by oligo-mesotrophic (seven species, 13.46%), oligotrophic (five species, 9.61%), and meso-eutrophic (four species, 7.69%) species. In total, they represent 92.29% of all Charophyta species. In addition, eutraphenic and hyper-eutraphenic species were also recorded, representing a smaller proportion of the Charophyta community (four species, 7.69%) (Figure 7a). Organic pollution is practically absent in the studied lakes, as the species indicators belong to water quality class 1, clear natural waters with a high degree of self-purification. The fact that classes 2 and 3 rank second together also supports this situation (Figure 7b).

3.4. Species–Environmental Relationships

We identified species that reached an abundance of 2–4 in order to identify the most favorable environmental conditions for the development of charophyte algae in the studied lakes. There were only nine of them, with Staurastrum punctulatum being the most abundant and occurring in almost every community (Supplementary Table S3). Environmental parameters were identified for the same lakes, so that data were presented without gaps.
Figure 8 shows the RDA plots of the correspondence between the environmental parameters (independent variables) and the abundance of species (dependent variables). Environmental variables that influenced the most abundant species formed three different groups (Figure 8a). Increasing water pH and temperature stimulated the abundance of three species of Cosmarium, whereas variables related to water salinity, such as conductivity, TDS, and Cl, as well as DO, stimulated Staurastrum punctulatum. Only one parameter, ammonia concentration, relates to increase in abundance of two species—Euastrum oblongum and Penium margaritaceum. Therefore, water salinity parameters can be a complex set of major factors stimulating the most abundant species, while all other factors have specific effects on the two lakes, KVL and VKL (Figure 8b), in the studied lakes of the Kaçkar Mountains National Park, 2020.

4. Discussion

In this study, the detection of benthic Charophyta communities in 13 high-mountain lakes and 1 pond in Kaçkar Mountains National Park and their relationship with environmental factors were investigated. At the end of the study, 78 epiphytic, epilithic, and epiphytic species were identified (Supplementary Table S2). The prominent families (Desmidiaceae, Zygnemataceae, and Closteriaceae) and genera (Cosmarium, Closterium, Staurastrum, Spirogyra, and Euastrum) in the flora are also similar to the charophyte flora of other high-mountain lakes studied in the region [11,12]. The similarity of macroclimatic conditions, soil structure, and lake characteristics are effective in this situation. Such a taxonomic composition, dominated by desmids, is typical of the northern flora [61,62]. The calculated intraspecies variability with an Ssp./Sp. index = 1.11 reflects the sensitivity of the revealed charophyte flora in the park in comparison to other habitats, especially in relation to Turkey’s algal flora as a whole = 1.09 [63].
Staurastrum punctulatum, found in 10 of the lakes studied, was recorded frequently (F) (1.28%) and was one of the most notable species in the desmid flora of the park. It was detected in epipelic, epilithic, and epiphytic habitats (Supplementary Table S2). This cosmopolitan taxon is seen in the benthic and tychoplankton communities of acidic to circumneutral (pH 6.7–7.0) oligotrophic waters. It also occurs in bogs and swamps, among other algae and mosses and in the Alps up to an altitude of 2800 m [41,42,45,48,49]. Cosmarium subcostatum and Penium margaritaceum were found in all benthic habitats of eight of the studied lakes and were recorded as common (C) (2.56%) (Supplementary Table S2). According to Lenzenweger (1999) and John et al. (2003) [42,45], Cosmarium subcostatum, which prefers low-nutrient lakes, is widespread in arctic–alpine waters (pH 6.9–7.2) up to 2500 m above sea level. Penium margaritaceum is a widespread species in oligotrophic, meso-oligotrophic, acidic, and neutral waters [31,45,48]. Additionally, Lenzenweger (1996) [40] states that this species can be found in the Alps up to an altitude of 2000 m. The physico-chemical data obtained in this study support the above literature information (Table 1 and Supplementary Table S1). Closterium acerosum and Closterium strigosum, which are indicators of α- and α–β-mesosaprobity, are known as inhabitants of eutrophic waters [28,64]. Therefore, the occurrence of these taxa in the Kaçkar Mountains National Park was remarkable. They were found to be very rare (VR) in the epipelic samples from lakes KPL-3, KPL-4, and VKL. According to Förster (1982) [30] and Shakhmatov (2018) [65], these taxa can be found in all types of water bodies.
The desmid flora of the 13 lakes and 1 pond was represented by a high proportion of cosmopolitan species (of the total number of desmid taxa). There were also some Holarctic, Boreal, Boreal–Arctic, Arctic–Alpine, and Alpine elements, such as Actinotaenium cucurbita, Cosmarium anceps, C. cucumis, C. galeritum, and Tetmemorus leavis, which underline the northern character of the desmid flora [40,41,42,61,66,67]. The presence of these species indicates that the lakes were influenced by glaciers [68,69,70,71].
The detection of the species Cosmarium pseudoconnatum and Micrasterias papillifera, which are on the Dutch Red List [64], is another remarkable result of this research. These species were found to be very rare (VR) in the epipelic, epilithic, and epiphytic samples from the lakes KVL and TSL-2.
Eutrophication and acidification are among the most significant problems that lakes have to face [72,73]. These problems are not present in the lakes studied according to the bioindicators and chemical data obtained from this research. At the same time, charophyte communities are very sensitive to anthropogenic influences and climate change [74,75], making their diversity difficult to restore after exposure, especially when the exposure is associated with a decrease in water pH. This leads us to recommend monitoring charophyte diversity in the Kaçkar Mountains National Park in the face of climate change and acidification.

5. Conclusions

The findings obtained at the end of this study are the first data on the benthic Charophyta flora of 13 lakes and 1 pond located in the Kaçkar Mountains National Park. A total of 78 Charophyta species were identified from lakes located at altitudes between 2782 and 3075 m above sea level, and 8 of them are new records for the Algal Flora of Turkey. Intraspecies variability is very high, with a Subspecies/Species index of 1.11, which reflects the sensitivity of the revealed charophyte flora and can be an indicator of biodiversity conservation efficiency. Bioindication and statistical methods characterize the studied lakes as unimpacted, but they need to be monitored. Current data show us that studies can be continued and especially that the number of desmid species may increase. In addition, the results of the research can help in monitoring the water quality and ecosystem state of the lakes in the Kaçkar Mountains National Park, which is under state protection. Intraspecific variability and bioindicator content can be used as instruments for conservation efficiency assessment, and are recommended as monitoring variables.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/conservation5010014/s1, Figure S1: Charophyte species 1; Figure S2: Charophyte species 2; Figure S3: Charophyte species 3; Figure S4: Charophyte species 4; Figure S5: Charophyte species 5; Figure S6: Charophyte species 6; Figure S7: Charophyte species 7; Table S1: Averaged physical and chemical data of the 13 high mountain lakes in the Kaçkar Mountains National Park, 2020; Table S2. List of Charophyta species in the lakes of the Kaçkar Mountains National Park in 2020 with species abundance, habitat preferences and ecological properties; Table S3. Most abundant species with coded names and environmental variables in studied lakes of the Kaçkar Mountains National Park, 2020.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, B.Ş. and S.B.; methodology, B.Ş. and S.B.; software, S.B.; validation, B.Ş. and S.B.; formal analysis, B.Ş. and S.B.; investigation, B.Ş.; resources, B.Ş.; data curation, B.Ş. and S.B.; writing—original draft preparation, B.Ş. and S.B.; writing—review and editing, B.Ş. and S.B.; visualization, B.Ş. and S.B.; supervision, B.Ş.; project administration, B.Ş.; funding acquisition, B.Ş. and S.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are either available in the article, or available on request from the authors.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by Trabzon University Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit (Project No: 20TAP00102) and partly by the Israeli Ministry of Aliya and Integration.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Falasco, E.; Ector, L.; Ciaccio, E.; Hoffmann, L.; Bona, F. Alpine freshwater ecosystems in a protected area: A source of diatom diversity. Hydrobiologia 2012, 695, 233–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Tarabay, A.B.; Villela, R.G.; Espino, G.L. Limnological aspects of a high-mountain lake in Mexico. Hydrobiologia 1991, 224, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Chapin, F.S.; Körner, C. Patterns, causes, changes and consequences of biodiversity in arctic and alpine ecosystems. In Arctic and Alpine Biodiversity: Patterns, Causes and Ecosystems Consequences, 2nd ed.; Chapin, F.S., III, Körner, C., Eds.; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 1995; pp. 313–320. [Google Scholar]
  4. Sommaruga, R. The role of solar UV radiation in the ecology of alpine lakes. J. Photochem. Photobiol. B Biol. 2001, 62, 35–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Psenner, R. Alpine lakes: Extreme ecosystems under the pressures of global change. EAWAG News 2003, 55, 12–14. [Google Scholar]
  6. Catalan, J.; Camerero, L.; Felip, M.; Pla, S.; Ventura, M. High mountain lakes: Extreme habitats and witnesses of environmental changes. Limnetica 2006, 25, 551–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Coesel, P.F.M. A method for quantifying conservation value in lentic freshwater habitats using desmids as indicator organisms. Biodivers. Conserv. 2001, 10, 177–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Wehr, J.D.; Sheath, R.G.; Kociolek, J.P. Freshwater Algae of North America: Ecology and Classification, 3rd ed.; Academic Press: San Diego, USA, 2015; pp. 1–15. [Google Scholar]
  9. Magner, M. Desmid Communities and Environmental Conditions of New England Wetlands. Bachelor’s Thesis, Assumption Universty, Worcester, MA, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  10. Geçen, R.; Toprak, V.; Tonbul, S. Glacial lakes on Eastern Blacksea Mountain their distribution and morphometric properties. In Proceedings of the International Geography Symposium on the 30th Anniversary of TUCAUM, Ankara, Turkey, 3–6 October 2018. [Google Scholar]
  11. Şahin, B.; Akar, B.; Barinova, S. Cohabitant charophyte algal flora and its ecology in high-mountain lakes of the Artabel Lakes Nature Park (Gümüşhane, Turkey). Bot. Serbica Program 2020, 44, 11–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Şahin, B.; Barinova, S. Assessment of Charophyta flora and ecological status in two high-mountain lakes (Rize, Turkey). Transylv. Rev. Syst. Ecol. Res. 2022, 24, 35–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Anonymous. Kaçkar Dağları Milli Parkı Uzun Devreli Gelişme Planı Analitik Etüt ve Sentez Raporu; Doğa ve Milli Parklar Genel Müdürlüğü: Ankara, Turkey, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  14. Sarı, D. A method to determine the potential for flora tourism in mountainous regions: A case study of the Kaçkar Mountains National Park, Turkey. Research 2019, 11, 27–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Eyüpoğlu, Y.; Dudas, F.O.; Zhu, D.; Liu, Z.; Chatterjee, N. Late cretaceous I- and A-type magmas in eastern Turkey: Magmatic response to double-sided subduction of Paleo- and Neo- Tethyan lithospheres. Lıthos 2019, 326, 39–70. [Google Scholar]
  16. Kurdoğlu, O. Kaçkar Dağları Milli Parkı ve Yakın Çevresinin Doğal Kaynak Yönetimi Açısından Incelenmesi. Ph.D. Thesis, Karadenizz Technical University, Ortahisar, Turkey, 2002. (In Turkish). [Google Scholar]
  17. Erinç, S. Klimatoloji ve Metodları; Istanbul University Faculty of Geography Publications: İstanbul, Turkey, 1969. [Google Scholar]
  18. Davis, P.H. Flora of Turkey and the East Aegean Islands; University Press: Edinburg, UK, 1965–1985; Volume 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  19. Gürpınar, T. Kuş göçü açısından Türkiye’nin önemi, Türkiye ve Balkan Ülkelerinde Yaban Hayatı. In Proceedings of the Uluslararası Sempozyumu Bildiriler Kitabı, İstanbul, Turkey, 16–20 September 1987. [Google Scholar]
  20. Round, F.E. An investigation of two benthic algal communities in Malharm Tarn, Yorkshire. J. Ecol. 1953, 41, 174–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Sládečková, A. Limnological investigation methods for the periphyton (“Aufwuchs”) community. Bot. Rev. 1962, 28, 286–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Schmidle, W. Beiträge zur alpinen algenflora. Osterr. Bot. Z. 1895, 45, 249–253. (In German) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. West, W.; West, G.S. A Monograph of the British Desmidiaceae, I, 3rd ed.; Printed for the Ray Society: London, UK, 1904; 224p. [Google Scholar]
  24. West, W.; West, G.S. A Monograph of the British Desmidiaceae, II, 3rd ed.; Printed for the Ray Society: London, UK, 1905; 204p. [Google Scholar]
  25. West, W.; West, G.S. A Monograph of the British Desmidiaceae, III, 3rd ed.; Printed for the Ray Society: London, UK, 1908; 274p. [Google Scholar]
  26. West, W.; West, G.S. A Monograph of the British Desmidiaceae, IV, 3rd ed.; Printed for the Ray Society: London, UK, 1912; 194p. [Google Scholar]
  27. West, W.; West, G.S. A Monograph of the British Desmidiaceae, V, 3rd ed.; Printed for the Ray Society: London, UK, 1923; 300p. [Google Scholar]
  28. Ruzicka, J. Die Desmidiaceen Mitteleuropas, Band 1, 3rd ed.; E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlangbuchhandlung (Nägele u. Obermiller): Stuttgart, Germany, 1977; 292p. (In German) [Google Scholar]
  29. Lind, E.M.; Brook, A.J. Desmids of the English Lake District, 3rd ed.; Freshwater Biological Association Scientific Publication: Cumbria, UK, 1980; 123p. [Google Scholar]
  30. Förster, K. Conjugatophyceae Zygnematales und Desmidiales (excl. Zygnemataceae), in Das Phytoplankton des Süßwassers Systematik und Biologie (Band) 8, Teil 1, Hälfte, 3rd ed.; E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlangbuchhandlung (Nägele u. Obermiller): Stuttgart, Germany, 1982; 543p. (In German) [Google Scholar]
  31. Croasdale, H.; Flint, E.A. Flora of New Zealand Desmids, I, 3rd ed.; Ward, V.R., Ed.; Government Printer: Wellington, New Zealand, 1986; 133p. [Google Scholar]
  32. Croasdale, H.; Flint, E.A. Flora of New Zealand Desmids, II, 3rd ed.; Ward, V.R., Ed.; Goverment Printer: Wellington, New Zealand, 1988; 147p. [Google Scholar]
  33. Croasdale, H.; Flint, E.A.; Racine, M.M. Flora of New Zealand Desmids, III, 3rd ed.; Manaaki Whenua Press: Canterbury, New Zealand, 1994; 218p. [Google Scholar]
  34. Ling, H.U.; Tyler, P.A. A Limnological Survey of the Alligator Rivers Region, II, Freshwater Algae, Exclusive of Diatoms, 3rd ed.; Australian Government Publishing Service: Canberra, Australian, 1986; 173p. [Google Scholar]
  35. Dillard, G.E. Freshwater Algae of the Southeastern United States: Part 3, Chlorophyceae: Zygnematales: Zygnemataceae, Mesotaeniaceae and Desmidiaceae, 1, 3rd ed.; Cramer, J.: Stuttgart, Germany, 1990; 172p. [Google Scholar]
  36. Dillard, G.E. Freshwater Algae of the Southeastern United States: Part 4, Chlorophycea: Zygnematales: Desmidiaceae, 2, 3rd ed.; Cramer, J.: Stuttgart, Germany, 1991; 205p. [Google Scholar]
  37. Dillard, G.E. Freshwater Algae of the Southeastern United States: Part 5, Chlorophyceae: Zygnematales: Desmidiaceae, 3, 3rd ed.; Cramer, J.: Stuttgart, Germany, 1991; 155p. [Google Scholar]
  38. Dillard, G.E. Freshwater Algae of the Southeastern United States, 6, Chlorophycea: Zygnematales: Desmidiaceae, 4, 3rd ed.; Cramer, J.: Stuttgart, Germany, 1993; 166p. [Google Scholar]
  39. Bourrelly, P.; Couté, A. Desmidiees de Madagascar (Chlorophyta, Zygophyceae), 3rd ed.; Cramer, J.: Stuttgart, Germany, 1991; 348p. (In French) [Google Scholar]
  40. Lenzenweger, R. Desmidiaceenflora von Östereich, 1, 3rd ed.; Bibliotheca Phycologica, 101; Cramer, J.: Stuttgart, Germany, 1996; 162p. (In German) [Google Scholar]
  41. Lenzenweger, R. Desmidiaceenflora von Östereich, 2, 3rd ed.; Bibliotheca Phycologica, 102; Cramer, J.: Stuttgart, Germany, 1997; 216p. (In German) [Google Scholar]
  42. Lenzenweger, R. Desmidiaceenflora von Östereich, 3, 3rd ed.; Bibliotheca Phycologica, 104; Cramer, J.: Stuttgart, Germany, 1999; 218p. (In German) [Google Scholar]
  43. Kouwets, F.A.C. Contributions to the knowledge of the French Desmid Flora, I, New and noteworty taxa from the Central and Eastern Pyrenees. Arch. Protistenkd. 1997, 148, 33–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Dingley, M. Desmids of New South Wales: New species and new records. Telopea 2001, 9, 601–637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. John, D.M.; Whitton, B.A.; Brook, A.J. The Freshwater Algal Flora of the British Isles: An Identification Guide to Freshwater and Terrestrial Algae, 3rd ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, USA, 2003; 702p. [Google Scholar]
  46. Brook, A.J.; Williamson, D.B. A Monograph on Some British Desmids, 3rd ed.; Ray Society: London, UK, 2010; 364p. [Google Scholar]
  47. Štastny, J. Desmids (Conjugatophyceae, Viridiplantae) from the Czech Republic; new and rare taxa, distribution, ecology. Fottea 2010, 10, 1–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Coesel, P.F.M.; Meesters, K.J. Desmids of the Lowlands Mesotaeniaceae and Desmidiaceae of the European Lowlands, 3rd ed.; KNNV Publishing: Zeist, The Netherlands, 2007; 351p. [Google Scholar]
  49. Coesel, P.F.M.; Meesters, K.J. European Flora of the Desmid Genera Staurastrum and Staurodesmus, 3rd ed.; KNNV Publishing: Zeist, The Netherlands, 2013; 357p. [Google Scholar]
  50. Kim, H.S. Algal Flora of Korea, 6, 1, 3rd ed.; Republic of Korea National Institute of Biological Resources Ministry of Environment: Incheon, Republic of Korea, 2012; 94p. [Google Scholar]
  51. Kim, H.S. Algal Flora of Korea, 6, 6, 3rd ed.; Republic of Korea National Institute of Biological Resources Ministry of Environment: Incheon, Republic of Korea, 2015; 95p. [Google Scholar]
  52. Guiry, M.D.; Guiry, G.M. AlgaeBase, World-Wide Electronic Publication. Available online: https://www.algaebase.org (accessed on 21 October 2024).
  53. Kocataş, A. Ekoloji (Çevre Biyolojisi), 3rd ed.; Ege Üniversitesi Matbaası: İzmir, Turkey, 1992; 570p. (In Turkish) [Google Scholar]
  54. Barinova, S. Essential and practical bioindication methods and systems for the water quality assessment. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Nat. Resour. 2017, 2, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Barinova, S.S.; Bilous, O.P.; Tsarenko, P.M. Algal Indication of Water Bodies in Ukraine: Methods and Perspectives; Publishing House of Haifa University: Haifa, Israel, 2019; 367p. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  56. McAleece, N.; Gage, J.D.G.; Lambshead, P.J.D.; Paterson, G.L.J. BioDiversity Professional Statistics Analysis Software, Jointly Developed by the Scottish Association for Marine Science and the Natural History Museum London; Publisher Informer Technologies, Inc., The Scottish Association for Marine Science: Oban, UK, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  57. Love, J.; Selker, R.; Marsman, M.; Jamil, T.; Dropmann, D.; Verhagen, J.A.; Ly, A.; Gronau, F.Q.; Smira, M.; Epskamp, S.; et al. JASP Graphical statistical software for common statistical designs. J. Stat. Softw. 2019, 88, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Ter Braak, C.J.F.; Šmilauer, P. CANOCO Reference Manual and CanoDraw for Windows User’s Guide: Software for Canonical Community Ordination (Version 4.5); Microcomputer Power Press: Ithaca, NY, USA, 2002; 500p. [Google Scholar]
  59. Şahin, B. New desmid records from Kaçkar Mountains National Park (Rize/Turkey). Biol. Divers. Conserv. 2022, 15, 171–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Şahin, B. Türkiye’nin Tatlısu suyosunu florası için yeni kayıtlar. Bağbahçe Bilim Derg. 2023, 10, 41–44. (In Turkish) [Google Scholar]
  61. Sterlyagova, I.N. Desmids in mountain lakes of the subpolar Urals. Biologia 2008, 63, 915–920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Šovran, S.; Jovanović, V.; Krizmanić, J.; Cvijan, M. Desmid flora from peat bogs in Serbia. Arch. Biol. Sci. 2013, 65, 721–732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Barinova, S. The effect of altitude on distribution of freshwater algae in continental Israel. Curr. Top. Plant Biol. 2011, 12, 89–95. [Google Scholar]
  64. Coesel, P.F.M. Sieralgen en Natuurwaarden; KNNV Publishing: Utrecht, The Netherlands, 1998; 56p. (In Dutch) [Google Scholar]
  65. Shakhmatov, A.S.; Pavlovskiy, E.V.; Paukov, A.G. Desmids algae (Charophyta: Conjugatophyceae) of Ekaterinburg, Middle Urals, Russia. Folia Cryptogam. Est. 2018, 55, 7–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Coesel, P.F.M. Biogeography of desmids. Hydrobiologia 1996, 336, 41–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Kosteviciene, L.; Briskaite, R.; Bakunaite, J.; Jakimaviciute, I. Desmids (Chlorophyta, Desmidiales) from Lithuania. Biologia 2003, 58, 685–695. [Google Scholar]
  68. Stamenkovic, M.; Cvijan, M. Some new and interesting ecological observation on desmids from yhe Province of Vojvodina (Northern Serbia). Biologia 2008, 63, 917–923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Fuzinato, S.; Cvijan, M.; Stamenkovic, M. A Checklist of desmids (Conjugatophyceae, Chlorophyta) of Serbian. II. Genus Cosmarium. Cryptogam. Algol. 2011, 32, 77–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Fuzinato, S.; Cvijan, M.; Stamenkovic, M. A Checklist of desmids (Conjugatophyceae, Chlorophyta) of Serbian. III. Genus Staırastrum. Cryptogam. Algol. 2011, 4, 363–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Kopyrina, L.; Pshennıkova, E.; Barinova, S. Diversity and ecology of non-diatom algae in a swampy mountain lake of the Suntar-Khayat Ridge (Republic Sakha, Yakutia, Russia). Transylv. Rev. Syst. Ecol. Res. 2022, 24, 17–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Bjork, S. Redevelopment of lake system-a case study approach. Ambio 1988, 17, 90–98. [Google Scholar]
  73. Lotter, A.F.; Pienitz, R.; Schmidt, R. Diatoms as indicators of environmental changes near Arctic and Alpine treeline. In The Diatoms: Application for the Environmental and Earth Sciences, 2nd ed.; Stoermer, E.F., Smol, J.P., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1999; pp. 205–226. [Google Scholar]
  74. van Dam, H.; Meesters, K. Did desmid assemblages in Dutch moorland pools recover from acidification in the past century? Hydrobiologia 2021, 848, 5011–5031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Muro, C.; Sandoval, J.; García, F.G.; Andrade, M.; Diaz-Nava, M. del C.; Alvarado, Y. Evaluation of environmental risks by heavy metals pollution and algae accumulations in two alpine lakes. Chem. Ecol. 2024, 41, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Conservation 05 00014 g001
Figure 1. The location of Kaçkar Mountains National Park. Adapted from [14]. Red rectangle—study site. Blue triangles—groups of studied lakes: 1, south; 2, middle; 3, north.
Figure 1. The location of Kaçkar Mountains National Park. Adapted from [14]. Red rectangle—study site. Blue triangles—groups of studied lakes: 1, south; 2, middle; 3, north.
Conservation 05 00014 g001
Conservation 05 00014 g002
Figure 2. Distribution of species number in genera in the Charophyta flora of the lakes in the Kaçkar Mountains National Park. Groups above the standard deviation line are marked in orange.
Figure 2. Distribution of species number in genera in the Charophyta flora of the lakes in the Kaçkar Mountains National Park. Groups above the standard deviation line are marked in orange.
Conservation 05 00014 g002
Conservation 05 00014 g003
Figure 3. Distribution of uniqueness species number of the floristic list in the lakes (Pooled Samples) of the Kaçkar Mountains National Park, 2020.
Figure 3. Distribution of uniqueness species number of the floristic list in the lakes (Pooled Samples) of the Kaçkar Mountains National Park, 2020.
Conservation 05 00014 g003
Conservation 05 00014 g004
Figure 4. Tree of Bray–Curtis’s similarity analysis of charophyte species composition in communities of the Kaçkar Mountains National Park, 2020. Cluster outlined by dashed line and toned.
Figure 4. Tree of Bray–Curtis’s similarity analysis of charophyte species composition in communities of the Kaçkar Mountains National Park, 2020. Cluster outlined by dashed line and toned.
Conservation 05 00014 g004
Conservation 05 00014 g005
Figure 5. JASP Network plot showing the correlation between charophyte abundance and total species richness in the lakes of the Kaçkar Mountains National Park, p < 0.5, calculated based on Supplementary Table S2. Major groups of the lakes abbreviated and colored in the legend. Blue lines are positive correlations, while red lines are negative correlations. The line thickness reflects the value of correlation. Dashed lines outline different clusters 1 and 2.
Figure 5. JASP Network plot showing the correlation between charophyte abundance and total species richness in the lakes of the Kaçkar Mountains National Park, p < 0.5, calculated based on Supplementary Table S2. Major groups of the lakes abbreviated and colored in the legend. Blue lines are positive correlations, while red lines are negative correlations. The line thickness reflects the value of correlation. Dashed lines outline different clusters 1 and 2.
Conservation 05 00014 g005
Conservation 05 00014 g006
Figure 6. Distribution of indicator species for the charophyte benthic communities by habitat preferences, oxygen saturation, pH, and water salinity for benthic communities in the Kaçkar Mountains National Park. Abbreviations of ecological groups: Substrate preferences (a): B—benthic, P-B—plankton-benthic. Oxygenation and water mobility (b): st—standing water, st-str—slowly streaming water, aer—aerophiles. Acidity degree (pH) (c): acf—acidophiles, ind—indifferent, alf—alkaliphiles, alb—alkalibiontes. Salinity degree (d): hb—halophobes, i—oligohalobes-indifferent.
Figure 6. Distribution of indicator species for the charophyte benthic communities by habitat preferences, oxygen saturation, pH, and water salinity for benthic communities in the Kaçkar Mountains National Park. Abbreviations of ecological groups: Substrate preferences (a): B—benthic, P-B—plankton-benthic. Oxygenation and water mobility (b): st—standing water, st-str—slowly streaming water, aer—aerophiles. Acidity degree (pH) (c): acf—acidophiles, ind—indifferent, alf—alkaliphiles, alb—alkalibiontes. Salinity degree (d): hb—halophobes, i—oligohalobes-indifferent.
Conservation 05 00014 g006
Conservation 05 00014 g007
Figure 7. Distribution of indicator species by trophic state and class of water quality for the charophyte benthic communities in the Kaçkar Mountains National Park. Trophic state indicators (a): ot—oligotraphentic, om—oligo-mesotraphentic, m—mesotraphentic, me—meso-eutraphentic, e—eutraphentic, o-e—hyper-eutraphentic. Colors of classes are the same as in the EU and USA color code (b).
Figure 7. Distribution of indicator species by trophic state and class of water quality for the charophyte benthic communities in the Kaçkar Mountains National Park. Trophic state indicators (a): ot—oligotraphentic, om—oligo-mesotraphentic, m—mesotraphentic, me—meso-eutraphentic, e—eutraphentic, o-e—hyper-eutraphentic. Colors of classes are the same as in the EU and USA color code (b).
Conservation 05 00014 g007
Conservation 05 00014 g008
Figure 8. RDA plots for dominant charoptyte species indicators with abundance scores of 3–4 and environmental variables in 11 studied lakes based on the data from Supplementary Table S3 of the Kaçkar Mountains National Park (p < 0.02). RDA plot for species richness, sum of scores, and environmental variables (a). RDA plot for studying lakes and environmental variables (b).
Figure 8. RDA plots for dominant charoptyte species indicators with abundance scores of 3–4 and environmental variables in 11 studied lakes based on the data from Supplementary Table S3 of the Kaçkar Mountains National Park (p < 0.02). RDA plot for species richness, sum of scores, and environmental variables (a). RDA plot for studying lakes and environmental variables (b).
Conservation 05 00014 g008
Table 1. Geographic coordinates, altitude, and surface area information of the studied lakes.
Table 1. Geographic coordinates, altitude, and surface area information of the studied lakes.
Lake with AbbreviationNorthSouthAltitude (m)Area (m2)
Kapılı Lakes-1 (KPL-1)40°42′56″.59 N40°54′51″.71 E298070.529
Kapılı Lakes-2 (KPL-2)40°43′08″.70 N40°54′55″.30 E297314.879
Kapılı Lakes-3 (KPL-3)40°42′34″.73 N40°54′49″.02 E307435.738
Kapılı Lakes-4 (KPL-4)40°42′43″.97 N40°54′47″.24 E30284.732
Kapılı Lakes-5 (KPL-5)40°42′59″.03 N40°54′20″.06 E29267.272
Vercenik Kumlu Lake (VKL)40°43′17″.91 N40°54′16″.58 E28643.279
Karadeniz Lake (KRDL)40°52′39″.19 N41°10′ 02″.06 E278224.141
Kavron Lake (KVL)40°52′24″.39 N41°09′45″.73 E29119.007
Büyük Deniz Lake (BDL)40°52′04″.60 N41°09′38″.54 E292268.244
Adsız Lake-1 (AL-1)40°42′39″.75 N40°54′57″.65 E3075162
Moçar Lake (ML)40°44′11″.63 N40°56′05″.36 E295822.246
Tatos Sulak Lakes-1 (TSL-1)40°44′16″.11 N40°56′42″.25 E297646.421
Tatos Sulak Lakes-2 (TSL-2)40°44′25″.50 N40°56′51″.18 E294017.337
Artificial pond (AP)40°52′53″.00 N41°07′52″.65 E227210.0
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Şahin, B.; Barinova, S. Biodiversity Conservation and Survival Factors of Charophyte Algal Communities in Protected High-Mountain Lakes of Kaçkar Mountains National Park (Rize, Turkey). Conservation 2025, 5, 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/conservation5010014

AMA Style

Şahin B, Barinova S. Biodiversity Conservation and Survival Factors of Charophyte Algal Communities in Protected High-Mountain Lakes of Kaçkar Mountains National Park (Rize, Turkey). Conservation. 2025; 5(1):14. https://doi.org/10.3390/conservation5010014

Chicago/Turabian Style

Şahin, Bülent, and Sophia Barinova. 2025. "Biodiversity Conservation and Survival Factors of Charophyte Algal Communities in Protected High-Mountain Lakes of Kaçkar Mountains National Park (Rize, Turkey)" Conservation 5, no. 1: 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/conservation5010014

APA Style

Şahin, B., & Barinova, S. (2025). Biodiversity Conservation and Survival Factors of Charophyte Algal Communities in Protected High-Mountain Lakes of Kaçkar Mountains National Park (Rize, Turkey). Conservation, 5(1), 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/conservation5010014

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop