Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Influence of a dam and tributaries on macrobenthos communities and ecological water quality in the Kebir–Rhumel wadi (Northeast Algeria) Cover

Influence of a dam and tributaries on macrobenthos communities and ecological water quality in the Kebir–Rhumel wadi (Northeast Algeria)

Open Access
|Apr 2025

Figures & Tables

Figure 1

Locations of the sampling sites upstream and downstream of the Beni Haroun dam in the Kebir–Rhumel catchment (-UC, -DC: upstream and downstream of the confluence; -TR: tributary).
Locations of the sampling sites upstream and downstream of the Beni Haroun dam in the Kebir–Rhumel catchment (-UC, -DC: upstream and downstream of the confluence; -TR: tributary).

Figure 2

Relative composition in macroinvertebrate orders in stations above (A) and below (B) the Beni Haroun dam.
Relative composition in macroinvertebrate orders in stations above (A) and below (B) the Beni Haroun dam.

Figure 3

PCA ordination plot explaining the variation of physicochemical parameters among sampling sites. DC: downstream of the confluence; PCA, principal component analysis; T-TR, Tara tributary; UC, upstream of the confluence.
PCA ordination plot explaining the variation of physicochemical parameters among sampling sites. DC: downstream of the confluence; PCA, principal component analysis; T-TR, Tara tributary; UC, upstream of the confluence.

Figure 4

CCA ordination diagram illustrating the relationships between macroinvertebrate taxa and physicochemical parameters in sites above (A) and below (B) the Beni Haroun dam. The codes of taxa are provided in Table 4. CCA, canonical correspondence analysis.
CCA ordination diagram illustrating the relationships between macroinvertebrate taxa and physicochemical parameters in sites above (A) and below (B) the Beni Haroun dam. The codes of taxa are provided in Table 4. CCA, canonical correspondence analysis.

Taxa richness and mean abundance of benthic macroinvertebrates collected above and below the Beni Haroun dam in the Kebir–Rhumel wadi_

TaxonCodeAbove the damBelow the dam
Rhumel wadi (Rh)S-TRKebir wadi (Kr)T-TR
TRICLADIDA
  Dugesia gonocephalaD.gon1471
  Polycelis felina -122
OLIGOCHAETA
  Lumbriculidae 1.671--
  Tubifex sp.Tub270---
  NaididaeNai16.67923-
HIRUDINEA
  Dina lineataD.lin29.3322--
  Erpobdella octoculata 0.67---
  Helobdella stagnalisH.sta2.673--
  Placobdella costata 0.67---
GASTROPODA
  Physa acutaP.acu29.3342122
  Ancylus fluviatilisA.flu-4-13
  Lithoglyphus naticoides 1---
ARACHNIDA
  Unionicola sp.Uni--28.3360
DECAPODA
  Atyaephyra desmarestiiA.des1.33285.33-
AMPHIPODA
  Gammarus sp. --0.674
DIPTERA
  ChironomidaeChi475253241.33440
  Limnophora ripariaL.rip-3-16
  Simulium hispaniolaS.his--0.6752
  S. (S.) ornatumS.orn-1076.33-
  S. (W.) pseudequinumS.pse196.6725116.67116
  S. (E.) aureumS.aur--32.33120
  CeratopogonidaeCer-116.6757
  Tabanus sp. 42.33-
  Culex sp. -2--
  TipulidaeTip0.3342.335
  Empididae 0.6721.33-
  Syrphidae 2.33---
  Hexatoma sp.Hex3.67477
  Dicranota sp. ---3
  Stratiomyidae --1.672
  Atherix sp.Ath--1.675
PLECOPTERA
  Capnia nigra --1.671
  Isoperla sp.Iso---11
  Leuctra sp. ---9
EPHEMEROPTERA
  Acentrella sinaicaA.sin--19.3326
  Baetis pavidusB.pav401.6741177448
  Baetis rhodaniB.rho--285
  Cloeon dipterumC.dip1.677-23
  Cloeon saharense ---5
  Procloeon stagnicolaP.sta--3.336
  Caenis luctuosaC.lus13108977
  Caenis pusillaC.pus--3.3367
  Ecdyonurus rothschildiE.rot--1.3341
  Choroterpes atlasC.atl---62
  Choroterpes lindrothiC.lin---13
COLEOPTERA
  Laccophilus hyalinus 130.67-
  Aulonogyrus striatusA.str--6.67-
  Gyrinus dejeani -21-
  Limnius intermediusL.int0.33110.6737
  Esolus filumE.fil7-1.6720
  Stenelmis consobrinaS.con---41
  Dryops sp.Dry0.3366.33-
  Hydraena sp. 3-1-
  Ochthebius -1--
  Hydrobius sp. 0.677--
  Laccobius gracilisL.gra3.33-2-
  Crenitis sp. -8--
  Coelostoma sp. -1--
  Helochares obscurus 2.67---
  Hydrochus sp. 2---
  Hydrocyphon sp. ---7
TRICHOPTERA
  Hydropsyche lobataH.lob51.334891.33193
  Hydropsyche maroccanaH.mar2.33272349
  Cheumatopsyche lepidaC.lep--624
  Rhyacophila munda ---2
  Pararhyacophila sp.Par--115
  Chimarra marginataC.mar---64
  Psychomyia pusilla --21
ODONATA
  Gomphus lucasiiG.luc--6.67-
  Praragomphus genei ---2
  Onychogomphus costae --1.33-
  O. unguiculatus --1.672
  Boyeria irene ---3
  Orthetrum chrysostigma -20.67-
  Sympetrum fonscolombii 0.67-1-
  Sympetrum striolatum 0.33-0.67-
  Brachythemis impartita 1.6742.33-
  Coenagrion sp.Coe2.3331-
  Erythromma lindenii -5--
  Ischnura graellsii 0.673--
  Platycnemis subdilatata --0.33-
HETEROPTERA
  Nepa sp. 0.67-0.671
  Micronecta sp.Mic110.3342020.67-
  Corixa punctata 2---
  Paracorixa concinna 2.67---
  Microvelia pygmaea -6--
  Gerris lacustrisG.lac1.6743.33-
  Naucoris maculatus -42.67-
  Naucoris cimicoides --0.67-
  Notonecta obliquaN.obl3.33---
  Anisops sardea 1---
Abundance 1634.3514381032.682240
Number of taxa 43415446

SIMPER and one-way ANOSIM on pairwise comparisons of sites using Bray–Curtis dissimilarities_ Upper triangular matrix shows the overall average dissimilarity (%) and lower triangular matrix shows the R-statistic_ Ns: not significant difference (p > 0_05)_

Above the damBelow the dam
R-UCR-CR-DCS-TR K-UCK-CK-DCT-TR
R-UC 45.5640.7761.68K-UC 45.5742.9962.75
R-C0.35 39.4856.5K-C0.24 48.9961.10
R-DC0.05Ns0.20Ns 61.33K-DC0.19Ns0.20Ns 60.41
S-TR0.970.971.00 T-TR0.991.000.79

Output from SIMPER analysis of macroinvertebrates, showing the most influential taxa to total dissimilarity among segments (Rh, S-TR, Kr, and T-TR)_ List of taxa, which cumulatively account for 50% of the dissimilarity between sample groups_ Av_%_ dissim: average% dissimilarity,%_ Cont_ dissim: % Contribution to the dissimilarity_

Pairwise comparisonR-statisticAv.%. dissimMost discriminating taxa%. Cont. dissimMost discriminating taxa%. Cont. dissim
Rh vs. S-TR0.9559.84Caenis luctuosa7.72Tubifex sp.4.28
Micronecta sp.6.17Hydropsyche maroccana3.35
Naididae5.97Limnius intermedius2.83
Simulium. (W.) pseudequinum5.59Dina lineata2.52
Baetis pavidus5.49Esolus filum2.26
Atyaephyra desmarestii4.3
Rh vs. Kr0.8759.09Simulium. (S.) ornatum5.77Physa acuta3.71
Caenis luctuosa5.47Hydropsyche maroccana3.56
Tubifex sp.4.84Simulium. (W.) pseudequinum3.42
Micronecta sp.4.5Acentrella sinaica2.94
Dina lineata4.29Baetis pavidus2.61
Chironomidae4.1Gomphus lucasii2.40
Simulium. (E.) aureum3.98
Kr vs. T-TR0.961.42Baetis rhodani4.44Caenis pusilla3.06
Chimarra marginata4.18Chironomidae2.79
Choroterpes atlas3.99Caenis luctuosa2.71
Simulium. (S.) ornatum3.83Simulium. (E.) aureum2.7
Limnius intermedius3.53Cloeon dipterum2.69
Simulium hispaniola3.52Stenelmis consobrina2.56
Ecdyonurus rothschildi3.49Unionicola sp.2.39
Simulium. (W.) pseudequinum3.18
S-TR vs. T-TR170.58Micronecta sp.5.78Simulium hispaniola2.99
Naididae3.97Caenis luctuosa2.97
Baetis rhodani3.85Atyaephyra desmarestii2.80
Baetis pavidus3.67Physa acuta2.58
Chimarra marginata3.36Caenis pusilla2.57
Choroterpes atlas3.21Simulium. (W.) pseudequinum2.49
Simulium. (E.) aureum3.05Acentrella sinaica2.17
Ecdyonurus rothschildi3Stenelmis consobrina2.06

Mean ± SD values of physicochemical variables at the sampling stations above and below the Beni Haroun dam in the Kebir–Rhumel wadi_ Values in bold indicate significant differences based on ANOVA_

VariableAbove the damBelow the damp-value
R-UCR-CR-DCS-TRK-UCK-CK-DCT-TR
T (°C)18.00 ± 6.0818.00 ± 6.2418.00 ± 7.0014.67 ± 5.5116.33 ± 6.6615.67 ± 6.3515.33 ± 6.6612.33 ± 4.930.526
pH8.23 ± 0.478.17 ± 0.358.10 ± 0.538.90 ± 0.358.80 ± 0.468.53 ± 0.388.67 ± 0.259.33 ± 0.350.062
DO (mg l−1)5.17 ± 0.855.23 ± 1.084.83 ± 0.996.40 ± 0.616.53 ± 0.706.73 ± 0.836.67 ± 0.657.93 ± 0.400.003
EC (μS cm−1)1701 ± 290.111693.33 ± 344.291728.33 ± 358.341370 ± 329.7986.67 ± 100.661048.33 ± 101.151050.67 ± 115.52718.33 ± 163.580.0001
Salinity0.87 ± 0.250.89 ± 0.300.92 ± 0.340.62 ± 0.130.51 ± 0.140.51 ± 0.130.52 ± 0.130.29 ± 0.080.034
NH4+ (mg l−1)1.90 ± 0.793.68 ± 1.833.98 ± 1.691.85 ± 2.820.14 ± 0.040.13 ± 0.030.12 ± 0.030.08 ± 0.030.009
NO2 (mg l−1)2.58 ± 2.461.94 ± 1.692.26 ± 2.060.36 ± 0.330.07 ± 0.050.06 ± 0.040.06 ± 0.050.02 ± 0.020.028
NO3 (mg l−1)2.75 ± 2.372.40 ± 1.713.23 ± 3.023.56 ± 1.090.67 ± 0.290.89 ± 0.270.98 ± 0.300.32 ± 0.160.023
PO43− (mg l−1)2.37 ± 0.592.52 ± 1.002.51 ± 0.871.56 ± 0.460.46 ± 0.120.44 ± 0.170.45 ± 0.160.31 ± 0.170.0001

Value of BMWP’ (Alba-Tercedor & Pujante, 2000) and ASPT biotic indices (Hynes, 1998) and color codes according to corresponding water quality classes_

Bioclassification of water quality
BMWP’ score≤1516–3536–6061–100101–150 >150
Color codesVery criticalCriticalDubiousPassableGood
ASPT values<3.94–4.95–5.96–6.9>7
Color codesVery poorPoorModerateGoodVery good

Value of EPT richness according to corresponding water quality bioclassification categories (Bode et al_, 1996)_

EPT richness index<22–56–10>10
Water qualityPoorCleanGoodExcellent

Water quality classification system based on the BI values (Hilsenhoff, 1987)_

Biotic indexWater qualityDegree of organic pollution
0.00–3.50ExcellentOrganic pollution unlikely
3.51–4.50Very goodPossible slight organic pollution
4.51–5.50GoodSome organic pollution probable
5.51–6.50FairFairly substantial pollution likely
6.51–7.50Fairly poorSubstantial pollution likely
7.51–8.50PoorVery substantial pollution likely
8.51–10.00Very poorSevere organic pollution likely

Pearson’s correlation between diversity and biotic indices with water physicochemical parameters_

SHEPTEPT/(EPT + Chironomidae)BIBMWP′ASPT
T°C–0.83*–0.93**–0.83*–0.74*0.86**–0.85**–0.82*
pH0.87**0.92**0.81*0.60–0.81*0.87**0.81*
DO0.76*0.97**0.81*0.74*–0.89*0.79**0.91*
EC–0.65–0.92**–0.76*–0.660.78*–0.69–0.91**
Salinity–0.71*–0.95**–0.77*–0.690.84**–0.74*–0.90**
NH4+–0.47–0.79*–0.52–0.430.77*–0.50–0.73*
NO2–0.66–0.92**–0.53–0.74*0.79*–0.64–0.76*
NO3–0.36–0.69–0.66–0.500.57–0.44–0.87**
PO3–0.55–0.87**–0.61–0.620.75*–0.57–0.83*

Mean ± SD values of biological indices and classification of water quality at the sampling stations above and below the Beni Haroun dam in the Kebir–Rhumel wadi_ Values in bold indicate significant differences based on ANOVA_

Biological indexAbove the damBelow the damp-value
R-UCR-CR-DCS-TRK-UCK-CK-DCT-TR
Taxonomic richness (S)14.00 ± 1.0018.00 ± 1.7313.33 ± 2.3124.33 ± 5.1320.33 ± 2.0814.00 ± 1.7323.33 ± 4.1627.67 ± 1.530.006
Shannon-Wiener index (H’)1.57 ± 0.251.82 ± 0.021.46 ± 0.432.19 ± 0.432.13 ± 0.392.16 ± 0.122.25 ± 0.212.57 ± 0.100.003
EPT index22.66 ± 0.582.33 ± 0.582.66 ± 0.583.66 ± 0.582.66 ± 0.5848.33 ± 1.530.009
Water-quality-evaluation ratingCleanCleanCleanCleanCleanCleanCleanGood
EPT/(EPT + Chironomidae)0.37 ± 0.040.64 ± 0.220.51 ± 0.160.65 ± 0.150.53 ± 0.250.71 ± 0.210.71 ± 0.310.76 ± 0.270.30
Hilsenhoff biotic index (BI)6.41 ± 1.946.38 ± 1.117.07 ± 0.645.85 ± 0.096.29 ± 0.495.79 ± 0.505.90 ± 0.565.54 ± 0.570.34
Water-quality-evaluation ratingFairFairPoorFairFairFairFairFair
BMWP’ index47.00 ± 2064.66 ± 7.5742.00 ± 7.2183.33 ± 14.2970.00 ± 16.6447.66 ± 2.0886.00 ± 15.62108.66 ± 12.420.001
Water-quality-evaluation ratingDubiousPassableDubiousPassablePassableDubiousPassableGood
ASPT index3.52 ± 0.214.22 ± 0.203.42 ± 0.233.96 ± 0.244.74 ± 0.404.62 ± 0.414.99 ± 0.256.05 ± 0.280.0001
Water-quality-evaluation ratingVery poorPoorVery poorVery poorPoorPoorPoorGood
DOI: https://doi.org/10.26881/oahs-2025.1.04 | Journal eISSN: 1897-3191 | Journal ISSN: 1730-413X
Language: English
Page range: 33 - 49
Submitted on: May 26, 2023
Accepted on: Dec 2, 2024
Published on: Apr 15, 2025
Published by: University of Gdańsk
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year

© 2025 Siham Chaba Mouna, Imad Mammeri, Fatah Zouggaghe, published by University of Gdańsk
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.