Pakistan J. Zool., vol. 43(2), pp. 0-0, 2011. Contribution on the Status and Distribution of Shrike Species in South-Eastern Anatolia, Turkey Recep Karakaş*
Department of Biology, Science and Art Faculty, University of Dicle, 21280 Diyarbakir/, Turkey. Abstract.- In this study, tThe status and distribution of four shrike species (Lanius collurio, L. minor, L. senator and L. nubicus)that belonging to Laniidae family in South-eastern Anatolia is presented on the basis of personal observations and available records. Four shrike species (Lanius collurio, L. minor, L. senator, and L. nubicus) that are belong to Laniidae family showing distribution in South-eastern Anatolia region, regularly. L. minor using region duringis a passage migrantion seasons while the others are summer visitors and regularly breeding in the region. L. nubicus breeds in Hasankeyf, Expanding agricultural production system under the Sourth-east Anatolia Project (GAP) is the main threat on to The the shrike and other bird species populations in the region, . like other bird species withThe use of fertilizer, herbicides and pesticides used for to boost agricultural production also impact the birds population adversely.
agriculture in this area is threatened under Sour-east Anatolia Project (GAP).
Key words: Laniidae, Shrike shrike species, Southsouth-eastern Anatolia, Turkey.
Shrikes are passerine birds of the family Laniidae and many of them show largeare widely distribution distributed in Eurasia and Africa (Cramp, 1998). They inhabit open habitats, especially steppe and savannah. Mainly sSeven shrike species of Laniidae familyhave been reported from Turkey; four of them are regular (L. collurio, L. minor, L. senator and L. nubicus) regular visitors, while two of them are vagrant (L. isabellinus and L. schach) and other the seventh is irregular sporadic winter visitor (L. excubitor) species for country (Kasparek and Bilgin, 1996; Kirwan et al., 2008). The four regular visitors The four species of Laniidae (L. collurio, L. minor, L. senator, and L. nubicus) regularly use South-eastern Anatolia region. These species are subject to habitat loss in their European distribution habitats and revealed classified as declining (Birdlife, 2004).
* Corresponding author: email@example.com There is alteration processLand use is being modified in south-eastern of Turkey arise fromas a result of implementation of South-east Anatolia Project (GAP - Güneydoğu Anadolu Projesi) by and effecting the agricultural regime changes. together with cClimatic changes is also impacting the habitat conditions (Ünlü et al., 1997; Welch, 2004).
* Corresponding author: firstname.lastname@example.org
0030-9923/2011/0003-0593 $ 8.00/0
Copyright 2011 Zoological Society of Pakistan.
By Through this project, water reservoirs were increased in the region and many parts of the steppe areas have been converted to arable land by irrigation, mainly after 1990s. Intensification of agriculture together with effects of fertilizer, herbicides and pesticides, that are used for to increase in crop production has affected the food availability for is the main threat on theto many bird species including shrike populations in the region. , mainly by food availability.
The aim of tThis paper is to show describes the current breeding distribution of these four shrike species in South-eastern part of Turkey, based on personal observations and recent literature in South-eastern part of Turkey.
Materials and methods
In order to determine the distribution of shrike species in South-eastern Anatolia region, all records of shrikes between the years 1998-2004 years were obtained from the published as well as unpublished works on the distribution of birds in the region. All of the records were obtainedPersonal observations were recorded using line transect method during field excursions conducted in areas shown as circlesd areas on the map (Fig. 1). by line transects methodology.
Fig. 1. The main studied areas
Results and Discussion
Table I shows the distribution of strike four shrike species in the region between the tyears 1998-2004.
Red-backed shrike Lanius collurio
The Redred-backed Shrike shrike (L. collurio) has large a wide breeding distribution covering most of central and eastern Europe to western and central Asia, including Turkey, Cyprus, and northern and western Iran (Cramp, 1998). In Europe, this species is in SPEC 3 category1 and and has been provisionally evaluated as ‘’Depleted’’ (Birdlife, 2004), due to the loss and fragmentation of habitat and overuse of pesticides (Cramp, 1998). It breeds in open cultivated areas, warm, dry or even semi-arid habitats with shrubs, or low trees. Species tThe species were was reported as widespread in many parts of Turkey (Cramp, 1998). The population was estimated at 400,000 – 800,000 pairs (2001 data, Birdlife, 2004) Although even though breeding population of this species is declining in Turkey. , but it still has about 400,000 – 800,000 pairs (according to 2001 data, Birdlife, 2004).
The species visits the region during the summer breeding season (confirmed breeding) and could be seen in many parts of South-eastern Anatolia between middle of April and beginning of September (there is one record at on 11 Oct 2003, presumably late migrant). During field excursions it was observed that the females arrived in the region later than males. These observations are in consonance with Biricik (1996);, Kasparek and Bilgin (1996) and Kirwan et al. (2008). Species shows common distribution as a summer migrant and definitely breeds in the region (Table II) compatible with the recent literature (Kirwan et al., 2008). During field excursion it was determined that mainly females arrive to region later than males. The literature records (Biricik, 1996; Kasparek and Bilgin, 1996) are support this results and species is commonly using region during breeding season.
Lesser grey shrike Lanius minor
The lesser grey shrike (L. minor) has breeding distribution extending is distributed from north-eastern Spain, south-eastern Europe to central Asia. It mainly prefers dry open lowland habitats with trees and bushes (Cramp, 1998). Although its European breeding population is large, there were widespread declines across most of Europe (Lefranc, 1995) and Turkey (Birdlife, 2004). Breeding population of this species in Turkey is estimated to be as 50,000-200,000 pairs (according to (2001 data, Birdlife, 2004). Species The species is in SPEC 2 category* and provisionally evaluated as declining in Europe (Birdlife, 2004), probably due to reduction is in prey population or food due to pesticide use (Cramp, 1998).
The species was recorded between the end of April to end of May, and from the middle of August to September, could be seen in many parts of South-eastern Anatolia i.e. during spring and autumn migration seasons together with L. collurio in the same habitats. Although Martins (1989) mentioned the species as local and uncommon summer visitor for South-eastern Anatolia together with large numbers on passage through Turkey, our resultsmy observations suggest that the species using region foris only a passage migrant.
Woodchat Shrike shrike Lanius senator
The Woodchat woodchat Shrike shrike (L. senator) is a widespread summer visitor to much of southern and central Europe, including Iberia, north-west Africa, the Middle East, Turkey and east of Iran (Cramp, 1998). The species continued to decline across most of its European range, so it is provisionally evaluated as ‘’declining’’ and SPEC 2 category (Birdlife, 2004). The breeding population of species is aboutwas estimated at 30,000 – 90,000 pairs and declining (according to 2001 data, Birdlife, 2004). It mainly uses open cultivated areas, semi-open areas with bushes, gardens, preferably with orchard trees and some bare or sandy grounds and feeds on large insects, small passerine birds and lizards (Cramp, 1998).
Species The species is commonly breeds in this part of country, and can be seen from middle of April to middle of September. They start carrying nest material at the end of April (28 April 2001). The nests with eggs were found by the end of May, whereas Young young individuals hatchlings appeared by the end of June. It is a summer migrant and breeds in the region, as has also been reported earlier by others (Martins, (1989; ) and Kasparek and Bilgin, (1996).
Masked Shrike shrike Lanius nubicus
The masked shrike (L. nubicus), is the smallest shrike which breeds mainly in south-eastern Europe, northern into Bulgaria, and the eastern Mediterranean, including Turkey, Cyprus, Israel and Syria, as well as western Iran (Cramp, 1998). Its European breeding population is relatively small, and the Greece and Turkey populations are declining. Species is provisionally evaluated as ‘’declining’’ and in SPEC 2 category in Europe (Birdlife, 2004). The species Mmainly feeds on large insects, small passerine birds, and lizards (Cramp, 1998). Turkey is holdingsupports the greatest part of the European breeding population, the and size of breeding populationwhich is reported as 30,000 – 90,000 pairs (according to 2001 data, Birdlife, 2004).
Table I.- Observation records of four shrike species in South-eastern Anatolia between 1998-2004
Table II.- Seasonal status of shrike species recorded in the region (+, species was recorded; Migration status)
Seasonal status for
SM, summer migrant; TM, transitory migrant, Breeding status, C, confirmed breeding.
Table III.- Average number of individuals recorded at each location
The species was restricts itself to high altitudes both during migration and breeding seasons. It breeds in Hasankeyf area, while using Karacadağ mountain areas during migration. Welch (2004) reported a small number of this species throughout the region as summer migrant, but the present study indicates that distribution is restricted to a few localities. Cramp (1998) has reported the mountain valleys of south-eastern part of Turkey as the distribution area of the species as also reported by that is compatible with previous (Kasparek and Bilgin, (1996).
and recent results.
The region is undergoing land use changes because of implementation of GAP project aimed at increasing the land area under irrigation; consequently many parts of steppes areas have been converted into arable lands; this presumably affects the climate (Ünlü et al., 1997). The region is undergoing climatic changes because of developing GAP project which is increasing the area of irrigated land, consequently many parts of steppes areas have been converted into arable lands which presumably effects the climate (Ünlü et al., 1997). Due toBecause of these changes in south-east of Turkey the faunal components of the region is likely to change in future. Because of agricultural intensification together with the increase is in the usage of pesticides, herbicides and fertilizer, many bird species (Tucker and Heaths, 1994) including shrike species (Yosef and Deyrup, 1998), have been affected, as the large insects that are the main prey of this group have been decimated (Welch, 2004).have been effected, due to the loss of large insects that are the main prey of this group (Welch, 2004).
The occurrence of Laniidae species is often related to the availability of suitable habitat including food and nesting areas. South-eastern part of Turkey offers the opportunity of observing six shrike species two of which are vagrant (L. isabellinus and L. schach). The Woodchat woodchat Shrike shrike is the commonest of all followed by Tthe Redred-backed Shrikeshrike. The lesser grey shrike is a transitory migrant species in the region whereas Mmasked sShrike is the most localized of all. While the other shrikes could be found in open habitats and mountain areas, Mmasked Sshrike was recorded only in mountain valleys. The other most favoured locations are Karacadağ, Kralkızı and Dicle Dam areas (Table III). Kirwan et al. (2008) reported the breeding range and distribution area of shrike species in all regions of Turkey including South-eastern Anatolia region, ; although the present study has however revealed a described different breeding range of species in South-eastern Anatolia (Karakaş and Kılıç, 2002, 2004, 2005; Karakaş, 2004).
As a result, tThere are still gaps in our knowledge on the distribution and habitat preference of the shrike species in Turkey (Perktaş, 2004). A comprehensive study is therefore needed on the effects of agricultural activities and bird abundance in South-eastern Anatolia region.
I would like to thanks Prof. Dr. Murat Biricik and Prof. Dr. Ahmet Kılıç for some records. Also, I would like to thank Engin Gem for his help to mapin mapping the study area.
Birdlife International, 2004. Birds in the European Union: a status assessment: Wageningen, The Netherlands: BirdLife International.
Biricik, M., 1996. Tr. J. Zool.,20: 155-160.
Cramp, S., 1998. The Complete Birds of the Western Palearctic, on CD-ROM. - Oxford University Press.
Karakaş, R., 2004. Acrocephalus,25: 139–148.
Karakaş, R. and Kiliç, A., 2002. Sandgrouse,24: 38-43.
Karakaş, R. and Kiliç, A., 2004. Tr. J. Zool.,28: 301-308.
Karakaş, R. and Kiliç, A., 2005. Sandgrouse,27: 139-146.
Kasparek, M. and Bilgin, C.C., 1996. Kuşlar (Aves). In: Türkiye Omurgalılar Tür Listesi (eds. A. Kence and Bilgin C.C). Tübitak, Ankara, Turkey, pp. 27-87.
Kirwan, G.M., Boyla, K., Castell, P., Demirci, B., Özen, M., Welch, H. and Marlow, T., 2008. The birds of Turkey.Christopher Helm, London.
Lefranc, N., 1995. Proc. West. Found. Vertebr. Zool.,6: 93-97.
Martins, R.P., 1989. Sandgrouse,11: 1-41.
Perktaş, U., 2004. Biol. Lett,. 41: 71-75.
Roselaar, C.S., 1995. Songbirds of Turkey. Pica Press. Robertsbridge. UK.
Tucker, G.M. and Heath, M.F., 1994. Birds in Europe: their conservation status. Birdlife International, Cambridge.
Ünlü, E., Özbay, C., Kiliç, A., Coşkun, Y. and Şeşen, R., 1997. GAP’ın Faunaya Etkileri. In: GAP’ın Ekolojiye ve Tarıma Etkileri. Türkiye Çevre Vakfı Yayını, Ankara. Turkey.
Welch, H.J., (Ed) 2004. GAP Biodiversity Research Project 2001-2003 / Final Report. DHKD (Doğal Hayatı Koruma Derneği). Istanbul, Turkey.
Yosef, R. and Deyrup, M.A., 1998. J. Ornithol.,139: 307-312.
(Received, 5 June 2009, revised 6 October 2010)
Pakistan J. Zool., vol. 43 (3), pp. 596-599, 2011. Growth Performance of Monosex and Mixed-Sex Tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) in Brackish Water by Using Salt-Tolerant Roughages as Supplementary Food Muhammad Ismail Chughtai* and Abdul Rasul Awan
Nuclear Institute for Agriculture and Biology (NIAB), P.O. Box No.128, Jhang Road, Faisalabad. Abstract.- A study was carried out to assess the culture performance of monosex and mixed-sex tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) in underground brackish water by using semi-intensive integrated pond system. The experiment
* Corresponding author: email@example.com
was conducted in three earthen ponds for a period of 11 months. In pond-1 (P1), 200 females and in pond-2 (P2), 200 males, while in pond-3 (P3), 100 male and 100 female tilapias were stocked. Salt-tolerant fresh biomass, i.e. Leptochloa fusca (Kallar grass), Brachiaria mutica (Para grass) and Kochia indica (Kochia) was used as supplemental feed. Fertilization of all ponds was done with goat droppings @ 6000 kg ha-1 and nitrophos @ 7.5 kg ha-1. Results indicated that tilapia was found well adapted to the saline environment. The net fish production was calculated as 1295, 1752 and 914 kg ha-1 year-1 in female, male and mixed tilapia ponds, respectively. Male tilapia culture resulted in a significant (P<0.05) increase in fish production.
In many countries, there is shortage of freshwater due to increased utilization in agriculture, industry and urban activities. These practices have increased pressure to develop aquaculture in brackish water (El-Sayed, 2009). Pakistan has vast area of brackish groundwater which can be best utilized for saline aquaculture. Tilapia is a suitable candidate because it can be stocked at high density and is resistant against diseases and tolerates low dissolved oxygen, high ammonia concentration and wide range of salinity (Altun et al., 2006). These characters make tilapia an excellent fish for culture as it has relatively low cost of production (Penña-Mendoza et al., 2005).
There are two methods of tilapia culture, monosex and mixed-sex culture. Traditional method of mixed-sex culture has failed in the past because of wild spawning that produces a large number of fry which stunt the growth of entire population. Culture of monosex male tilapia resolved this problem (Chakraborty and Banerjee, 2010). Monosex culture is the best method which gives faster growth and control over population (Coleman, 2001). Male tilapia has better growth than female due to variation in genetic capability and because females are mouth breeders (Hafeez-ur-Rehman et al., 2008).
Keeping in view the importance of monosex tilapia culture, the present study was conducted to determine the growth performance of monosex and mixed-sex tilapia in brackish water by using salt-tolerant roughages as supplementary food.
Materials and methods
The experiment was conducted in three earthen ponds, each with dimensions 25 m × 13 m × 1.5 m located at Biosaline Research Station (BSRS), Pakka Anna at a distance of 50 km in South-West of Faisalabad, Pakistan (lat. 31o.24’ N and long. 73o.05’ E).
All the ponds were watered up to 1.5 m and maintained throughout the experimental period. The pond-1 was stocked with 200 females, pond-2 with 200 males, while in pond-3, mixed-sex (100 males and 100 females) tilapia were stocked. The tilapia nursery at stocking time was about two months old with an average weight of 15.3±4.1 g and average length 8.2±0.5 cm. The identification of male and females of tilapia was done manually on the basis of number of openings of genital papilla by applying indigo dye.
Salt-tolerant plants, i.e. Leptochloa fusca (Kallar grass), Brachiaria mutica (Para grass) and Kochia indica (Kochia) grown at the experimental site were used in chopped form as a supplementary food. All the ponds were fertilized with goat droppings @ 6000 kg ha-1 and nitrophos @ 7.5 kg ha-1.
Soil and water analysis was done before the start of experiment. During the experiment, water analysis was done on monthly basis by using methods of USDA Handbook-60 (Richards, 1954).
On monthly basis, a sample of 10 fishes was captured randomly from each experimental pond. Their body weight and length was recorded to calculate averages. After obtaining the data, the fishes were released back into their respective ponds. The data were subjected to analysis of variance to find out statistically significant relationship among various parameters by using MSTATC program (version 2.10).
Results and discussion
Results of water analysis indicated that average range of pH throughout the growing period was 8.4 to 8.6 and EC 5.7 to 6.2 dS m-1. The sodium adsorption rate (SAR) and residual sodium carbonate (RSC) ranged from 59.8 to 67.2 and 19.4
Table I.- Comparison for monthly average weight and length gain in female (P1), male (P2) and mixed (P3) tilapia.
Average weight gain (±SD)
Average length gain (±SD)
Table II.- Comparison for cumulative growth parameters and fish production in all three ponds.
Gain in av. weight (g)
Gain in av. length (cm)
Gross fish production (kg ha-1 year-1)
Net fish production (kg ha-1 year-1)
Female tilapia (P1)
Male tilapia (P2)
Mixed tilapia (P3)
*Mean with different superscript alphabets differ significantly at p<0.05
to 20.1 meq L-1, respectively. The SAR indicates the relative proportion of Na+ to Ca2++Mg2+, whereas RSC indicates the sodium hazards. El-Sherif and El-Feky (2009) reported that the suitable range of pH for tilapia culture is 7 to 8 to get maximum growth and survival rate. Yadav (2006) investigated the lethal alkaline limit for tilapia which is pH 11.
At stocking time, the males and females were separated carefully but at the time of netting in March to collect monthly data, the fish fry was found in pond-1 (females) and pond-2 (males), which showed that the sexing of tilapia was not done accurately. So fishes of both the ponds were netted out and the water was drained to dry the ponds. After examination, it was found that three male fishes were present in the pond-1 (all female), while four females were found in Pond-2 (all male). The fishes were re-stocked in their respective ponds after careful examination. After 335 days of growth period, fishes were harvested from all experimental ponds. Survival rate was found to be 100% throughout the experimental period.
The initial average weight of female tilapia was 15±3.5 g while the final weight was 208±13.1 g in pond-1. There was net gain of 193 g. The maximum increase (25.2 g) in average weight was observed in September (Table I). Similarly, initial length of female tilapia at stocking was 8.1 cm while final was 22.2 cm with net gain 14.1 cm in pond-1 (Table I). The gross fish production was found to be 1417 kg ha-1 year-1, while the net production of female fish was 1295 kg ha-1 year-1 in pond-1 (Table II).
The male fish having average weights of 15.6±4.6 g was stocked initially. A final harvest male tilapia had an average weight 305±12.7 g in pond-2. The net gain in average weight was 289 g. The maximum increase in average weight was 40.4 in August (Table I). Similarly, initial length of male tilapia was 8.3 cm while final was 24.5 cm with net gain 16.2 cm in pond-2 (Table I).The gross fish production in male monoculture was calculated as 1878 kg ha-1 year-1, while the net production was 1752 kg ha-1 year-1 in pond-2 (Table II).
The initial average weight of mixed-sex tilapia culture (pond-3) was 15.4±4.4 g, while the final average weight was recorded as 143±21.3 g. There was net gain of 128 g in 11 months. The maximum increase in average weight was observed 15 g in May and November (Table I). Similarly, initial total length in mix-tilapia was 8.2 cm while final was 20.3 cm with net gain 11.9 cm in pond-3 (Table I). The gross fish production was calculated as 963 kg ha-1 year-1, while the net production was 914 kg ha-1 year-1 in pond-3 (Table II).
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed highly significant (P<0.05) difference in commutative monthly gain in body weight and length in different monosex and mixed-sex culture ponds. The maximum comulative monthly weight gain was in August (25.9 g) and minimum in February (11.6 g). Similarly, maximum cumulative monthly gain in length was in May (2.8 cm) and minimum in December (0.5 cm).
The results of overall growth performance against roughages revealed that in monosex culture of tilapia, male tilapia grew 1.47 times faster than females and 2.12 times than mixed-sex culture. The females grew 1.45 times lesser than males but faster than mixed-sex culture. Culture of male tilapia resulted in significantly higher net pond production than in mixed-sex culture.
Schreiber et al. (1998) reported that male tilapia grow faster than females, which may be caused either by a sex-specific physiological growth capacity, female mouth-brooding or the more aggressive feeding behavior of males. Female tilapia has low growth potential because they become sexually mature after 4-6 months and they devote more energy into egg production than into growth (Hafeez-ur-Rehman et al., 2008). In mixed-sex tilapia culture, uncontrolled reproduction may result in the stunting of the originally stocked fish as reported by Green et al. (1997).
Khanum et al. (2007) carried out the nutritional evaluation of salt-tolerant plants (Kallar grass, Para grass and Kochia) and reported 8 to 11% crude protein level which is very low than the fish requirement. Yildirim et al. (2009) reported that more than 20% crude protein is suitable for good tilapia production in brackish water.
The production of tilapia can be increased by adopting single sex culture. Furthermore, for 100% accurate sexing, a high degree of expertise is required. In addition, supplemental feed ingredients like fish meal, rice polish, gluten, oil cake etc. with high crude protein level (more than 20%) must be used in formulated form along with salt-tolerant fresh biomass to further improve the fish growth and production in brackish water.
The authors are very grateful to Dr. Khalid Mahmood, Deputy Chief Scientist, Nuclear Institute for Agriculture & Biology (NIAB), Faisalabad for providing all the required facilities during the research work and his valuable suggestions regarding improvement in the text. The help rendered by the field staff of Biosaline Research Station (BSRS), Pakka Anna, is also acknowledged.
Altun, T., Tekelioglu, N. and Danabas, D., 2006. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci., 23: 473-478.
Coleman, R., 2001. Cichlid News Mag., 10:32-34.
Chakraborty, S.B. and Banerjee, S., 2010. Int. J. Biol., 2: 44-48.
El-Sherif, M.S. and El-Feky, A.M.I., 2009. Int. J. Agric. Biol. 11: 297-300.
Green, B.N.W., Veverica, K.L. and Fitzpatrick, M.S., 1997. Fry and fingerlings production. In: Dynamics of pond aquaculture (eds. H. Egna and C. C. Boyd), CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, pp. 215–243.
Hafeez-ur-Rehman, M., Ahmed, I., Khan, N. and Rasool, F., 2008. Int. J. Agri. Biol., 10: 352–4.
Khanum, S.A., Yaqoob, T., Sadaf, S., Hussain, M., Jabbar, M.A., Hussain, H.N., Kausar, R. and Rehman, S., 2007. Pak. Vet. J.,27: 129-133.
Penña-Mendoza, B., Gómez-Márquez, J.L., Salgado-Ugerte, I.H. and Ramírez-Nogguera, D., 2005. Rep. Biol. Trop.,53: 515-522.
Schreiber, S., Focken, U. and Becker, K., 1998. J. appl. Ichthyol., 14: 43-7.
Richards, L.A. (Ed.), 1954. U.S. Salinity Lab. Staff. Diagnosis and Improvement of Saline and Alkali Soil. USDA Handbook 60. Washington D.C. US.
Yadav, C.N.R., 2006. Our Nature, 4:107-110.
Yildirim, O., Turker, A., Ergun, S., Yigit, M. and Gulsahin, A., 2009. Afr. J. Biol., 8: 9092-3096.
(Received 7 September 2010, revised 15 October 2010) Pakistan J. Zool., vol. 43(3), pp. 600-601, 2011. Monitoring of Fecal Coliforms in Drinking Water Sources of Tehsil Mardan, Pakistan Ihsanullah Khan,1 Asim Yaqub,2 * M. Awais,2 Huma Asim,3 Romana Jamshed,1 and I.A. Faridi4
1Sustainable Water Sanitation Health and Development Programme, Department of Environmental Sciences, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology, Abbottabad, Pakistan.
2Life Sciences Services Centre, Department of Environmental Sciences, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology, Abbottabad, Pakistan.
3Department of Chemistry, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology, Abbottabad, Pakistan.
4Department of Occupational Health, Institute of Public Health Lahore, Pakistan Abstract.- With an objective to determine the extent of fecal coliforms in the drinking water sources of tehsil Mardan, five samples were collected from each village of twelve union councils and tested with commercially available Water Check field kits. Fifty eight percent of the samples were found contaminated with fecal coliforms where as 42% were safe for drinking purposes. Results of the study will provide a guideline to improve the current water quality of the area.
Unsafe drinking water is responsible for environmental diseases. Diarrhea is one of those associated with the risk factors and estimated 94 % of the diarrheal burden is attributable to environment (WHO, 2006). Pathogens transmitted via drinking water are predominantly of fecal origin (Ashbolt et al., 2001; Hunter et al., 2002). A fecal bacterium in surface water indicates the potential to cause severe illnesses such as typhoid fever, hepatitis, cholera, dermatitis and leptospirosis
(Craun and Frost, 2002). Commonly used indicators of pathogen contamination such as fecal coliform can not distinguish the difference between human and animal origin (Feacham, 1975).
Of 160 million in Pakistan 65% population have access to safe water. In Pakistan, the quality of fresh water has been altered by the impacts of domestic sewage, industrial effluents, and agriculture runoff. Pakistan Council for Research in Water Resources launched a National Water Quality Monitoring Program (2001–2006) in the country. Bacterial contamination in the federal capital’s water supply in 2006 increased to an alarming 74% compared to 48% in 2005, 65% in 2004, 40% in 2003 and 74% in 2002. According to the report, bacterial contamination in Quetta has gone up to 71% in 2006 from 50% in 2002; Hyderabad from 73% in 2002 to 93% in 2006; Gujranwala from 29% in 2002 to 64% in 2006; and Ziarat, where bacterial contamination remained 100% from 2002 to 2006 (Govt. of Pakistan 2001).
The objective of the study was to monitor the drinking water resources for fecal coliforms. The data of the research may be guide line to find the possible recommendations for improvement of the water quality.
Materials and methods
A total of 250 samples from 50 villages in 12 union councils were collected for analysis. The study area is densely populated and is composed of more than one million populations. The study area is partly rural and partly urban. Both sides of a river named Kalpani which is a tributary of river Swat was selected because this river is recharging the adjacent wells and tube wells. The area was previously reported as main source of waterborne diseases in the area.
The drinking water samples were examined for fecal coliformsusing the commercially available Water Check field kit. The sample (100 ml) containing medium was kept at room temperature for 48 hours. Color change of water to shade of green or blue shows the fecal contamination which means water was not fit for drinking. No change of color or to yellow, off white, brownish shade showed the absence of coliforms, and water was considered fit for drinking.
Results and discussion
Figure 1 shows the incidence (%) of fecal coliforms in drinking water samples of different Union Councils of tehsil Mardan. About 90 % samples in the Union council M5 (Par Hoti) and 70 % in M3 (Shamatpur), M6 (Mayar) and M8 (Dagai) were contaminated. Similarly 50-60 % samples from M1 (Turo), M2 (Sikandary), M4 (Hoti), M9 (Gujar Garhi), M10 (Baghdada) and M11 (Kas Kaurona) showed presence of coliforms. Figure 1 also shows the presence of coliforms in 47 % samples of M7 (Mardan Khas) and M12 (Ghaladir).
Fig. 1. The incidence of fecal coliforms bacteriain drinking water samples of twelve Union Councils of Tehsil Mardan.
From data it is also concluded that 148 of 250 samples were contaminated with fecal coliforms. It is about 58 % of water is unsafe for drinking in the study. According to WHO drinking water standards the fecal coliforms and total coliforms should be absent in 100 ml of water sample (WHO, 1993).
More than 30% area under study is rural. The rural water supply situation in NWFP is worse, 46 % of rural population depends upon water from dug well or from a river/canal/stream (EPA, 2005). In Mardan, major source of drinking water is ground water (bore hole, tube wells, wells and hand pumps). M1 Toru is located south of Mardan city, surrounded by two perennial Nallah called Kalpani and Balar. In this area most of the sewage is discharged into these streams. In rural part of M1 and M2, water is drawn from the dug wells and hand pumps, which are highly contaminated.
Most of the area of union council M4 (Hoti) is urban and water is supplied by the water pump. It is divided into two parts by a River called Kalpani. Across the Kalpani is M5 (Par Hoti) comprising the villags of Qadir Khan Kurona, Khan Kohi and Faram.. Samples collected from the villages of M5 had the fecal coliforms. In M5 water is directly excavated from ground by hand pump both for the human and animals. The primary source of fecal coliforms is animal feces.
Likewise water supply in New Baghdada a part of union council M10 (Baghdada) is through water pumps from the source without passing through any treatment or filters. Similar data was collected in the case of M9 (Gujar Garhi) and M11 (Kas Kaurona).
From overall analysis it is concluded that the main sources of fecal coliforms are the animal feces, domestic sewage and agriculture activities. It is recommended that different methods must be adopted for public awareness about use of safe drinking water. Also chlorination should be encouraged in all water distribution systems or low cost filters should be introduced among the people of the affected area.
Ashbolt, N.J., Grabow, W.O.K. and Snozzi, M., 2001. In: Water quality: Guidelines, standards and health. Risk assessment and management for water-related infectious disease (eds. L. Fewtrell and J. Bartram). IWA Publishing, London, pp. 289–315.
Craun, G.F AND Frost, F.J., 2002. Int. J. environ. Hlth. Res., 12: 5–15.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Pakistan, 2005. State of the environment report. The essential resources. pp. 39-62.
Feacham, R.G., 1975. Water Res.,9: 689–690.
Government of Pakistan, 2001. Ten years perspective development plan (2001–11), Planning Division, Government of Pakistan.
Hunter, P.R., Waite, M. and Ronchi, E., 2002. Drinking water and infectious disease: Establishing the links. IWA Publishing, London.
WHO, 1993. Guidelines for drinking water quality. Office of Publications, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.
WHO, 2006, Preventing disease through healthy environments – Towards an estimate of the environmental disease burden, Geneva.
(Received 8 March 2010, revised 20 October 2010)
Pakistan J. Zool., vol. 43 (3), pp. 602-604, 2011. First Report of Siphonaria (Mollusca: Gastropoda) Species From The Rocky Coasts Off Karachi, Pakistan (Northern Arabian Sea) Azra Bano1,3 Muhammad Moazzam,2 Zarrien Ayub1 and Ghazala Siddiqui1
1 Centre of Excellence in Marine Biology, University of Karachi, Karachi, Pakistan
2 Marine Fisheries Department, Government of Pakistan, Karachi Fish Harbour, West Wharf, Karachi, Pakistan
3Lasbela University of Agriculture, Water and Marine Sciences, Uthal, Balochistan, Pakistan Abstract.- In the present study three species of Siphonaria, viz., S. ashgar, S. belcheri and S. kurracheensis were identified on the rocky coasts of Karachi. Two species, S. ashgar and S. belcheri are being reported for the first time from Pakistan whereas S. kurracheensis was already reported earlier.
Key words:Siphonaria ashgar, Siphonaria belcheri, Siphonaria kurracheensis, rocky coasts, Karachi, Arabian Sea
Pulmonate limpets of the genus Siphonaria are common components in the rocky intertidal habitats throughout the world (Hodgson, 1999). More than 70 species of Siphonaria occur globally (Hubendick, 1946), most of these are distributed in the lower latitudes of the Indo-Pacific (Hubendick, 1947). Earlier reported species of Siphonaria from Pakistan include Siphonaria kurracheensis (Reeve, 1856; Melvill and Standen, 1901), S. javanica sipho (Melvill and Standen, 1901), S. lecanium (Melvill and Standen, 1901). Later, the gastropod fauna of the rocky shores off the coast of Pakistan were extensively studied (Khan and Dastagir, 1970; Ahmed et al., 1982; Barkati and Burney, 199l; Moazzam and Ahmed, 1994; Ahmed and Hameed, 1999; Nasreen et al., 2000); however, no study reported the presence of Siphonaria species on the coast of Pakistan. One of the authors of this MS, has
* Corresponding author: firstname.lastname@example.org
made frequent visits in last 35 years to the rocky coasts off Karachi and always found Siphonaria species in the area. The present study aims to describe three species of Siphonaria which exist on the rocky coasts of Karachi.
Materials and methods
Specimens of Siphonaria were randomly collected from three rocky ledges of Karachi, namely Mubarak Village, Buleji and Sandspit (Fig.1), from December 2004 to December 2005. The three species of Siphonaria collected in the present study are found at three different positions above the mean water level. The tides off the Karachi coasts are semi diurnal type with the tidal range of about 3.0 meters (Quraishee, 1975).
Fig. 1. Map showing the location of the three sampling sites (Buleji, Sandspit, and Mubarak Village) along the coast of Karachi, from where samples of Siphonaria species were collected.
The specimens were identified following the literature of Bosch et al. (1995) and the maximum shell length of each specimen was measured with vernier calipers (± 0.1 mm).
The shell is thick and conical; central apex smooth, the outer margin is nearly smooth with faintly marked siphonal groove. The shell is etched with variable numbers of radial ribs (usually 38-46), between each of which are thinner ribs. Interior of the shell is light or dark brown with white and off-white radial streaks at the margin. The species was found attached on rocks at 3 meters above the mean sea level.
This species was first described by Biggs (1958) from Persian Gulf. It was also reported in the Gulf of Oman (Bosch et al., 1995) and Kuwait Bay (Abdul-Salam and Al-Khedery, 1992).
Siphonaria belcheriHanley, 1858
(Fig. 2C, D) Numbers of individual collected: 793
Size: 5-22 mm
Locality: Buleji, Sandspit and Mubarak Village
The shell is thick and low conical, the outer margin is not very smooth and the siphonal groove projects prominently. The sculpture consists of variable numbers of strong radial ribs (usually 12-16) with narrower ribs between them. Two radial ribs are nearly fused at site of the siphonal groove. The shell is off-white with brown stripes; interior of shell has white rays with pale brown colour in between, muscle scar is light orangish. The species was found attached on the rocks at 1-2 meters above the mean sea level.
The species was reported from Arabian Sea, Mediterranean (Turkey) and Mauritius (Trew, 1983; Bosch et al., 1995; Albayrak and Çağlar, 2006).
Fig. 2. Siphonaria species; dorsal (A) and ventral (B) views of Siphonaria ashgar; dorsal (C) and ventral views of S. belcheri (D); dorsal (E) and ventral (F) views S. kurracheensis:. Scale= 5 mm.
Siphonaria kurracheensis Reeve, 1856
(Fig. 2E, F)
Numbers of individual collected: 270
Size: 7-22 mm
Locality: Mubarak Village
The shell is moderately thick and flattened, with variable number of strong radial ribs (usually 10-14) projecting from outer margin of shell, the siphonal groove prominent. Outer shell is brown with ribs darker brown; interior of shell is light brown with white or beige colour in the centre. This species was found attached to rocks at 0.5 meter above the mean sea level.
A holotype of this species was collected from Karachi (Reeve, 1856). It was also reported from Mekran Coast (Pakistan) (Melvill and Standen, 1901). This species has a wide distribution in the Indo-West Pacific region and was reported in Western Australia, New Caledonia, India, Persian Gulf, Gulf of Oman, Philippines, Hong Kong, Samoan Islands and Hawaiian Islands (Trew, 1983; Bosch et al., 1995).
The shells of Siphonaria are commonly called as false limpets because of their superficial resemblance to true limpets (Patelloidea) to whom they are distantly related. One of the authors of this MS has made frequent visits in last 35 years to the rocky coasts off Karachi and always found Siphonaria species in the area and thus this species cannot be considered as an invasive species. It is possible that the earlier studies conducted on the gastropod fauna (Khan and Dastagir, 1970; Ahmed et al., 1982; Barkati and Burney, 199l; Moazzam and Ahmed, 1994; Ahmed and Hameed, 1999; Nasreen et al., 2000) due to the small sizes of Siphonaria spp. either neglected it or incorrectly identified them as Patella or Cellana spp. as these two species are abundant on rocky coasts.