International Journal of Ecology & Development

Fall 2010; Vol. 17, No. F10 ; Int. J. Ecol. Dev.

ISSN 0972-9984 ( Print ); ISSN 0973-7308 (Online)
Copyright © 2010 IJED (CESER Publications)

Habitat Use of Fishes in streams of Kalakad Mundanthurai

Tiger Reserve, India

J. A. Johnson* and M. Arunachalam

Sri Paramakalyani Centre for Environmental Sciences

Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, Alwarkurichi - 627 412.
Tamil Nadu, India.

* Present address: Wildlife Institute of India

P.Box No. 18, Chandrabani, Dehradun – 248001, Uttarakhand, India.
Email: [email protected]

ABSTRACT

Habitat inventory and utilization of habitat by fishes were assessed in six selected streams in
Kalakad Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve. The major habitat types; pool, riffle, run and cascade were
identified. Fish population were estimated from pools, runs, riffles and cascades using underwater
observation and fish catch in each habitat. Ten cyprinid fishes were recorded from the study
streams and the assemblage structure was varied between 2 and 6. Habitat utilization coefficient
was evaluated for individual species using electivity index. Based on the habitat utilization five
habitat use guild (pool, riffle, run, cascade and generalist) were proposed. Danio aequipinnatus,
Tor khuree and Puntius kannikattiensis were utilized the pool habitat. Rasbora daniconius found in
run guild. The members of riffle and cascade guilds were Bhavania australis and Puntius
tambraparaniei. The fishes Horalabiosa joshuai and Garra mullya were established in all possible
habitat types and they were the members of generalist guild.

Key words: assemblage structure, habitat guild, habitat use, stream fishes, western ghats.

Mathematics Subject Classification Number: 92F05.

Journal of Economic Literature Classification Number: Q2, Q22, Q57.

INTRODUCTTION

Habitat quantification is essential to understand ecological principals of habitat use by organisms and
to evaluate the habitat requirement to multi-species communities. Most fishes in small streams are
habitat specialists and utilize specific locations within stream channels in response to different
spawning and feeding requirements (Gorman and Karr, 1978). The resource partitioning in a
community may be important to the knowledge of the nature of these interrelationships (Schoener,
1974). The most important dimension of the resource partition for the fish assemblages are the habitat
use (Ross, 1986). Competition and interactions leading to habitat segregation in fishes are common to
facilitate coexisting of several species as well as multiple age classes in temperate (Kalleberg, 1958;
Schlosser and Toth, 1984; Lobb and Orth, 1991) and tropical streams (Moyle and Senanayake, 1984;
Wickramanayaka and Moyle, 1989). Kalakad Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve (KMTR) in southern
Western Ghats of India has many streams and rivers to form a major river basin called Tamiraparani,
a perennial east flowing system. Freshwater fish assemblages are quite rich and diverse in this region
(Johnsingh and Vickram, 1987; Rema Devi, 1992). Currently, extensive literature on taxonomy and

www.ceser.res.in/ijed.html
www.ceserp.com/cp-jour/
 International Journal of Ecology & Development

check list of fishes with few details on abundance and assemblage organization are available for
streams and rivers of Western Ghats (Silas 1951; 1953; Rajan 1963; Rema Devi and Menon 1994;
Rema Devi et al. 1997; Easa and Shaji 1997; Johnson and Soranam, 1999; Arunachalam and
Johnson 2002; Arunachalam et al. 2002). However, good attempt have also been taken in the recent
years to address the diversity distribution and assemblage organisation of Western Ghats fish
communities. Arunachalam (2000) studied association of microhabitat variables to species diversity
and microhabitat usage of fishes in Western Ghats streams. Similarly, diversity, endemisity and
distribution patterns of fishes also explained in detail in central part of Western Ghats (Bhat, 2003;
2004; Dahanukar et al. 2004) and Kerala part of Western Ghats (Raghavan et al. 2008). However, the
study of habitat utilization patterns of freshwater fish assemblages have not been documented in
Western Ghats streams. In this paper habitat use of fishes were analysed in headwater streams of
KMTR.
STUDY AREA

Kalakad Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve is covering about 841 km2 area in the south eastern end of
Western Ghats. It lies between latitudes 8o 25' to 8o 53' N and longitudes 77o10' to 77o 35' E with
altitudes ranging from 50 m to the highest point Pothikaimalai peak reaching 1868 m. Peak area
represents diverse vegetation types and the core zone of the reserve is considered as one of the
important floristic diversity centers in India (Nayar, 1996). The rich and dense forest types are
important for watershed area for 14 streams and 12 tributaries joined to form a perennial east flowing
system called Tamiraparani. Six headwater streams: Peyar, Kannikatti, Chittar, Ullar, Karaiyar and
Gowthaliyar are selected for habitat utilization study (Fig. 1).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Habitat inventory was carried out at a fixed point, which is designed as a reference point (zero). This
reference point can be readily recognizable by others with a prominent structure like bridge, culvert,
confluence of two tributaries or other man-made structures. Different types of habitat types such as
pools, riffles and cascades were recorded within 100 m reach. Pools are areas of slow, tranquil flow
without small-scale hydraulic jumps or free surface in stabilities and with few boulders exposed at low
flow. Riffles are the areas of sub-critical flow modified by local free-surface instabilities and small
hydraulic jumps over bed roughness elements. Water surface typically has a rippled appearance;
depths are shallower and velocities greater than pools at low flow. Runs are channel unit
distinguished from riffle by greater percentage of stream area, substratum more or less homogenous
with cobbles of gravels and at low flow. Cascades are steep channel units where water flows over
large boulders in a serious of short, well-defined steps about one meter (< 1 m) high that are
separated by areas of more tranquil flow less than one channel width in length create a staircase
appearance. Habitat inventory was followed by the methods described in Armantrout (1990) and
Schlosser (1991).

Fish populations were estimated in each habitat type based on underwater observation and fish catch
using cast net and dragnet. Habitat specific utilization coefficient was calculated for individual species
using the electivity index of Ivelev (1961) based on Schlosser (1991).

Habitat specific density - Average total density

Utilization coefficient =
Average total density

35
 Int. J. Ecol. Dev.; Vol. 17, No. F10, Fall 2010

Where,
Habitat specific density = average density in the habitat type of interest
Average total density = average density over the entire stream reach, all habitats
combined

Values of this habitat utilization coefficient theoretically range from minus one, indicating total non-use
of a habitat type, to positive infinity as a greater proportion of the population resides in the habitat type
of interest. A value of zero indicates that the population occurs in the habitat types in proportion to that
type's abundance in the stream.

RESULTS

Habitat inventory, the major habitat features such as pools, riffles, cascades and runs were identified
in KMTR streams and among which the pools and riffles were frequently accounted for 100m reach.
Dammed pools, lateral scour pools and backwater pools were more common in most of the streams.
Low gradient with larger channel width and high gradient riffles were also present.. Runs and
cascades are tended to be small and less frequent. The streams, Peyar, Kannikatti, Chittar, Karaiyar
and Gowthalaiyar in the core zone of KMTR area represented mostly by overhanging terrestrial
vegetation and in Ullar stream in the same region recorded high proportion of organic debris. Total 10
species of cyprinid fishes were recorded in six study streams and the fish assemblage structure was
varied between 2 and 6 (Table 1). In the highly undisturbed Peyar, Kannikatti and Chittar are
inhabited by two species viz., Horalabiosa joshuai and Garra mullya. Whereas the Gowthaliyar stream
had quite rich fish assemblage structure, where six species of fishes (Bhavania australis, Danio
aequipinnatus, Horalabiosa joshuai, Puntius tambiraparniei, Puntius filamentosus and Tor khudree)
were recorded.

Results of habitat utilization coefficient explained Garra mullya, mostly utilized the pool habitat in
Peyar and Kannikatti streams, whereas Horalabiosa joshuai found in pool, riffle and run habitats (Fig.
2, 3). In Chittar Garra mullya predominantly utilized pool and run habitats, while Horalabiosa joshuai
utilized pool and run habitats (Fig. 4). In Ullar stream, Horalabiosa joshuai and Puntius kannikattiensis
utilized pool habitat and Noemacheilus traiangularies used both pool and run habitats. Garra mullya
found in riffle, run and cascade. Cascade and riffle habitats were used by a specialized form Bhavania
australis. Pool habitats were nun use habitat for Garra mullya and Bhavania australis (Fig. 5). In
Karaiyar stream, Danio aequipinnatus, Tor khuree and Noemacheilus traiangularies utilized absolutely
the pool habitat and Garra mullya was used riffle habitat. In the absence of Horalabiosa joshuai in
Karaiyar, Rasbora daniconius utilized both pool and run habitats (Fig. 6). In Gowthaliyar, Danio
aequipinnatus utilized exclusively pool habitat and Tor khuree, Puntius. filamentosus and Horalabiosa
joshuai utilized both pool and run habitats. Cascade and riffle habitats were used by Puntius
tambraparaniei (Fig. 7).

Habitat utilization patterns of fishes in KMTR suggested five habitat use guilds (pool, riffle, run,
cascade and generalist). Danio aequipinnatus, Tor khuree and Puntius kannikattiensis were found in
deeper section of the channel unit called pool guild. Rasbora daniconius composed run guild. The
members of riffle and cascade guilds were Bhavania australis and Puntius tambraparaniei. The fishes
Horalabiosa joshuai and Garra mullya were established in all possible habitat types called generalist
guild.

36
 International Journal of Ecology & Development

DISCUSSION

Predictable spatial pattern of channel morphology and flow regime are exist in natural stream
ecosystem. Shallow cascades, riffles and pools occur in high gradient streams, with addition of
deeper pools and riffles in lower reach of stream (Leopold et al., 1964; Yang, 1971). Most of the
cyprinids are commonly found in deeper (pool) habitat with fewer, smaller individuals are in shallow,
unstable (riffle) habitat. In riffle habitat water depth is a major predictor of fish density. Lower water
column would at some point make riffle habitat unsuitable for larger cyprinids (Braaten and Berry Jr,
1997) but it is more suitable for small cyprinids. Many of the fishes living in riffle habitat have
adaptations such as suckers; flattened depressed bodies and horizontally expanded well developed
fins to resist the threat of being swept away by the current. For example, Bhavania australis, Garra
mullya and Puntius tambraparaniei are well adopted to live in swift flowing high gradient riffles.
Generally, in highly structured stream community, the fish species are consistently associated with a
singly habitat type across the stream channels (Braaten and Berry Jr, 1997). Such habitat–based
approach has been identified as the primary basis for assessing fish community organization in
stream ecosystem (Schoener, 1974). Numerous studies have supported this generalization for fish
communities (e.g., Gibbons and Gee, 1972; Werner and Hall, 1976; Werner et al., 1977; Schlosser
and Toth, 1984; Bain et al., 1988; Lobb and Orth, 1991; Braaten and Berry Jr, 1997). In the present
study the habitat utilization coefficient based fish community–habitat model reflects five habitat use
guilds (pool, run, riffle, cascade and generalist) in the KMTR streams. Similar studies have been
described in which two to six habitat guilds of fish in warm water streams are reported (Schlosser,
1982; Bain et al., 1988; Leonard and Orth, 1988; Lobb and Orth, 1991; Aadland, 1993; Braaten and
Berry Jr, 1997). The proposed habitat guilds are in general agreement with those guilds previously
proposed in small streams of other region. Results of the present study suggest, the specialized form
Bhavania australis represent a riffle and/or cascade guilds. The greater structural diversity in riffle
compared to runs and pools may have supported numerous low-velocity microhabitats that provide
refuge for such specialized forms (Braaten and Berry Jr, 1997). Similar habitat – fish community
model has been reported from the Himalayan fish assemblages where the specialized form
Glyptothorax is in riffle guilds (Edds, 1993; Johal, 1998).

Moreover, Braaten and Berry Jr (1997) hypothesed that, most of the fishes are distributed evenly
among the habitat and do not exhibit changes in habitat use. However, the assemblage organization
in KMTR streams differs substantially from the concept, because in the present finding the most
cyprinids species did not consistently associate with a single habitat. Present study, the small
cyprinid Garra mullya utilized pool habitat in Peyar and Kannikatti streams and riffle, run and cascade
habitats in Ullar stream. For example, in Ullar stream, Puntius kannikattiensis is dominant cyprinids
predominantly found in pool habitat and the co-existing species Garra mullya was segregated from
pool habitat and used mostly riffle and run habitats whereas in Peyar and Kannikatti streams, Garra
mullya occupied almost all possible habitats. Such substantial overlaps in habitat utilization in cyprinid
communities may be due to absence of competitive co-existing species. Similar findings have also
been reported in warm water streams (Gibbons and Gee, 1972; Werner and Hall, 1976; Schlosser
and Toth, 1984; Leonard and Orth, 1988) and in temperate streams (Baker and Ross, 1981;

37
 Int. J. Ecol. Dev.; Vol. 17, No. F10, Fall 2010

Schlosser, 1982). However, the present study reflects similarity in the habitat fish community model
as in temperate streams.

CONCLUSIONS

Habitat utilization pattern of fishes is a major goal of fish ecologist to understand the competitive
interaction among the co-existing species in a well structured community. It also helps mangers to
prediction habitat requirement of fish species. Our data demonstrated that small scale habitat
segregation of fish communities in southern Western Ghats streams have influenced by presence of
co-existing species with similar ecological niche. Same time in the absence of competition, fishes (for
example Garra mullya) utilize all types of habitat. Our study also demonstrated that competitive
interaction leads for habitat segregation in stream fish community. Moreover habitat based approach
also help in identify the macrohabitat requirement of rare and endangered species. Such information
could be utilized for the conservation and management of threatened population.

REFERENCES

Aadland, L.P., 1993, Stream habitat types: Their fish assemblages and relationship to flow, North
American Journal of Fisheries Management, 13, 790–806.

Armantrout, N.B., 1990, Aquatic habitat inventory, Bureau of Land Management, Eugene district,
Oregon, USA.

Arunachalam, M., 2000, Assemblage structure of stream fishes in the Western Ghat, Hydrobiology, 430,
1–31.

Arunachalam, M., and Johnson, J.A., 2002, A new species of Puntius (Hamilton) from Tamiraparani
river, Journal of Bombay National History Society, 99(3), 474–480.

Arunachalam, M., Johnson, J.A., and Rema Devi, K., 2002, Homaloptera santhampariensis, a new
species of Balitorid fish (Teleostei: Balitoridae) from a Western Ghats stream of Kerala, India, Acta
Zoologica Taiwanica, 13(1), 31-37.

Bain, M.B., Finn, J.T., and Booke, H.E., 1988, Stream flow regulation and Fish community structure,
Ecology, 69, 382–392.

Baker, J.A., and Ross, S.T., 1981, Spatial and temporal resource utilization by South eastern cyprinids,
Copeia, 178–186.

Bhat, A., 2003, Diversity and composition of freshwater fishes in the river systems of Central Western
Ghats, India, Environmental Biology of Fishes, 68, 25–38.

Bhat, A., 2004, Patterns and distribution of freshwater fishes in rivers of Central Western Ghats, India
and their association with environmental gradients, Hydrobiologia, 529, 83-97.

Braaten, P.J., and Berry Jr, C.R., 1997, Fish associations with four habitat types in a South Dokota
Prairie stream, Journal Freshwater Ecology, 12, 477– 489.

Dahanukar, N., Raut, R., Bhat, A., 2004, Distribution, endemism and threat status of freshwater fishes in
the Western Ghats of India, Journal of Biogeographer, 31, 123–136.

Easa, P.S., and Shaji C.P., 1997, Freshwater fish diversity in Kerala part of Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve,
Current Science, 73(2), 180 –182.

Edds, D.R., 1993, Fish assemblage structure and environmental correlates in Nepal’s Gandanki river,
Copeia, 48–60.

38
 International Journal of Ecology & Development

Gibbons, J.R.H., and Gee, J.H., 1972, Ecological segregation between longnose dace (Genus:
Rhinichthys) in the Pink River, Manitoba, Journal of Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 29, 1245–
1252.

Gorman, O.T., and Karr, J.R., 1978, Habitat structure and stream fish community, Ecology, 59, 507–
515.

Ivelev, V.S., 1961, Experimental ecology of the feeding of fishes, Yale University Press, New Have CT.

Johal, M.S., 1998, Fishes of Himachal Pradesh (India), in Proceedings of Indo–U.S. Workshop on
conservation and development of natural fishery resources of Western Himalayas, Chandigarh, Punjab
University, 22-35.

Johnsingh, A.J.T, and Viickram, D., 1987, Fishes of Mundanthurai Wildlife Sanctuary, Tamil Nadu,
Journal of Bambay Natural History & Society, 84, 526–533.

Johnson, J.A., and Soranam, R., 2001, A new species of Horalabiosa Silas from a Kerala stream of the
western Ghats, Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, 98(3), 392-395.

Kalleberg, H., 1958, Observation in a stream bank of territoriality and completion in juvenile Salmon and
trout (Salmo salar L. and S. trulla), Reports of the Institute of Freshwater Research, Drottningholm, 38,
55-98.

Leopold, L.B., Wolman, M.G., and Miller, J.P., 1964, Fluvial Processes in Geomorphology, Freeman
Press, San Francisco, California.

Lobb, M.D.-III., and Orth, D.J., 1991, Habitat use by an assemblage of fish in a large warm water
stream, Trans American Fisheries Society, 120, 65–78.

Moyle, P.B., and Senanayake, F.R., 1984, Resource partitioning among the fishes of rainforest streams
in Sri Lanka, Journal of Zoology, 202, 195-223.

Nayar, M.P., 1996,. ‘Hot Spots’ of endemic plants of India, Nepal and Bhutan, Tropical Botanical Garden
and Research Institute, Kerala, India.

Raghavan, R., Prasad, G., Ali A., and Pereira, B., 2008, Fish fauna of River Chalakudy part of Western
Ghats biodiversity hotspot (South India) - patterns of distribution, threats and conservation needs,
Biodiversity Conservation, 17, 3119-3131.

Rajan, S., 1963, Ecology of the fishes of the river Pykara and Moyar (Nilgiris) South India, Proceedings
of Indian Academy of Science, 58(B), 291-323.

Rema Devi K., Indra, T.J., Raghunathan, M.B., Mary Bai, M., and Ravichandran, M.S., 1997,
Ichthyofauna of the Tamiraparani river system, Tamil Nadu, Zoo’s print Journal, 12(7), 1-2.

Rema Devi, K., 1992, Fishes of Kalakad wildlife sanctuary, Tirunelveli district, Tamil Nadu, India with a
redescription of Horalabiosa joshuai Silas, Journal of Bambay Natural History & Society, 92 (1-4), 193 –
209.

Rema Devi, K., and. Menon A.G.K., 1994, Horalabiosa palaniensis, A new cyprinid fish from Palani Hills,
Western Ghats, South India, Journal of Bombay Natural History & Society, 91, 110-111.

Ross, S.T., 1986, Resource portioning in fish assemblages: a review of field studies, Copeia, 352–388.

Schlosser, I.J., 1982, Fish Community structure and function along two habitat gradients in a headwater
stream, Ecological Monograph, 52, 395-414.

Schlosser, I.J., 1991, Stream fish ecology a landscape perspective, Biological Science, 41, 704-712.

39
 Int. J. Ecol. Dev.; Vol. 17, No. F10, Fall 2010

Schlosser, I.J., and Toth, L.A., 1984, Niche relationships and population ecology of rainbow
(Etheostoma Caeruleum) and fantiail (E. flabellare) darters in temporally variable environment, Oikos,
42, 229–238.

Schoener, T.W., 1974, Resource partitioning in ecological communities, Science, 185, 27-39.

Silas, E.G., 1951, On a collection of fishes from Anamalai and Nelliampathi hill ranges (Western Ghats)
with notes on its Zoogeographical significance. Journal of Bombay Natural History & Society, 49, 670-
681.

Silas, E.G., 1953, New fishes from the Western Ghats, with notes on Puntius arulius (Jerdon), Records
of Indian Museum, 51, 27-38.

Warner, E.E., and Hall, D.J., 1976, Niche shifts in sunfish: experimental evidence and significance,
Science, 191, 404–405.

Warner, E.E., Hall, D.J., Laughlin, D.R., Wagher, D.J., Wilsmamn, L.A., and Funk, F.C., 1977, Habitat
partitioning in a freshwater fish community, Journal of Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 34, 360-
370.

Wikramanayake, E.D., and Moyle, P.B., 1989, Ecological structure of tropical fish assemblages in wet-
zone streams of Sri Lanka, Journal of Zoology, 218, 503-526.

Yang, C.T., 1971, Formation of riffles and pools, Water Resource Research, 7, 1567–1574.

40
 International Journal of Ecology & Development

Table 1. Fish assemblage structure in streams of Kalakad Mundenthuri Tiger Reserve.

Fish species Species Peyar Kanni Chittar Ullar Karaiy Gowth

abbrevi- katti ar aliyar
ation
Bhavania australis B.h - - - + - +
Danio aequipinnatus D.a - - - - + +
Garra mullya G.m + + + + + -
Horalabiosa joshuai H.j + + + + - +
Noemacheilus traingularis N.t - - - + + -
Puntius tambiraparniei P.a.t - - - - - +
Puntius filamentosus P.f - - - - - +
Puntius kannikettiensis P.k - - - + - -
Rasbora daniconius R.d - - - - + -
Tor khudree T.k - - - - + +

Figure 1. Map of the study streams in Kalakad Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve.

41
 Int. J. Ecol. Dev.; Vol. 17, No. F10, Fall 2010

Figure 2. Habitat specific utilization co-efficient of fishes in Peyar stream [species

abbreviations find table 1].

42
 International Journal of Ecology & Development

Figure 3. Habitat specific utilization co-efficients of fishes in Kannikatti stream

[species abbreviations find table 1].

43
 Int. J. Ecol. Dev.; Vol. 17, No. F10, Fall 2010

Figure 4. Habitat specific utilization co-efficient of fishes in Chittar stream [species

abbreviations find table 1].

44
 International Journal of Ecology & Development

Figure 5. Habitat specific utilization co-efficients of fishes in Ullar stream

[species abbreviations find table 1].

45
 Int. J. Ecol. Dev.; Vol. 17, No. F10, Fall 2010

Figure 6. Habitat specific utilization co-efficients of fishes in Karaiyar stream

[species abbreviations find table 1].

46
 International Journal of Ecology & Development

Figure 7. Habitat specific utilization co-efficient of fishes in Gowthalaiyar stream

[species abbreviations find table 1].

47