SINET:Ethiop. J. Sci.

, 45(2): 192–204, 2022 ISSN: 0379–2897 (PRINT)

© College of Natural and Computational Sciences, Addis Ababa University, 2022 eISSN: 2520–7997

Date received: August 31, 2021; Date revised: July 30, 2022; Date accepted: Auigust 06, 2022
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4314/sinet.v45i2.6

Distribution of benthic macroinvertebrates in relation to physicochemical parameters and

macrophyte cover in the Ketar River, Ethiopia

Yadesa Chibsa1,*, Seyoum Mengistou 2 and Demeke Kifle 2

1Department of Biology, College of Natural and Computational Sciences, Wachemo University,

Hossana, Ethiopia
2 Department of Zoological Sciences, College of Natural and Computational Sciences, Addis Ababa

University, Ethiopia. E-mail: [email protected]

ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to determine the effects of physicochemical parameters and
macrophyte on the macroinvertebrate assemblages in the Ketar River, which drains into Lake Ziway.
Six sampling sites were selected along the river stretch and samples were collected from December to
April 2017/2018 based on the method outlined in Ontario Benthos Biomonitoring Network Protocol
Manual. A total of 5,450 individuals comprised of one class, 7 orders, and 23 families were collected
during the study period. Hemiptera families were the predominant taxa and contributed the largest
percentage of the total samples followed by the Coleoptera. Notonectidae and Corixidae shared the
highest total abundance. This study confirmed that the sites covered with macrophytes were
significantly different from the substrate both in taxa richness and total abundance (P < 0.05).
Redundancy Analysis revealed that pH, Temperature, electric conductivity, DO, NO2, NO3, NH4, SiO2
and TP were the most important variables explaining the variation in macroinvertebrate assemblage
patterns. The mean Shannon diversity index also indicated that the sites covered by the macrophyte
stand had a significantly higher value than the sites sampled from the substrate, which implies that
macrophytes support abundant, and promoting the diversity of macroinvertebrates. Thus, the
conservation of macrophytes can enhance the conservation of macroinvertebrates along the course of
the river, besides the role of macrophyte in sediment trapping and reducing sedimentation buildup in
Lake Ziway.

Key words/phrases: Diversity, Ethiopia, Ketar River, Macroinvertebrates, Macrophyte cover,

Substrate, Water quality
they exhibit differential tolerances to changes in
environmental condition (Adu et al., 2016). The
INTRODUCTION distribution of macroinvertebrate communities in
aquatic systems can be influenced by abiotic and
Benthic macroinvertebrates (benthos) live on biotic factors (Damanik-Ambarita et al., 2016).
rocks, debris, sediments, and aquatic plants (Vyas Among the main abiotic factors that can influence
& Bhawsa, 2013). Most benthic invertebrates are the distribution of macroinvertebrate include
immobile and cling to their habitat, and then they geomorphology (mainly substrate type and matter
quickly react to environmental changes input; (Durães et al., 2016), temperature (de Nadaï-
(Czerniawska-Kusza, 2004). The distribution of Monoury et al., 2014), dissolved oxygen (Rezende
et al., 2014), environmental quality (Damanik-
benthic macroinvertebrates depends on the
Ambarita et al., 2016), and habitat heterogeneity
relative importance of abiotic (water quality) and
(Heino et al., 2015).
habitat (substrate type) factors, aside from other Macrophytes are an important habitat, provide
biotic influences such as competition and protection from predators and water current
predation. Aquatic macroinvertebrates are (Baker et al., 2016) and source of food (Thomaz &
reflected as good indicators of water quality (Basu Cunha, 2010) and promote the diversity and
et al., 2018) and are affected by physical, chemical, distribution of macroinvertebrates (Damanik-
and biological conditions (Poikane et al., 2016). Ambarita et al., 2016). Different macrophyte
Aquatic macroinvertebrates constitute an species and different morphological structure of
important component of an aquatic ecosystem and
_____________________
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
SINET: ETHIOP. J. SCI., 45(2), 2022 193

macrophytes provide different habitats to a.s.l. near Lake Ziway (at the inlet) to about 4171
macroinvertebrates (Thomaz & Cunha, 2010; m a.s.l, on the high volcanic ridges along the
Quintão et al., 2013), and variation in habitat, in eastern part of the watershed (Chilalo and Galama
turn, enhance diversity richness and abundance of Mountains) (Damtew Tufa, 2015). The river shows
macroinvertebrate communities (Thomaz & striking variations in physical structure and
Cunha, 2010). nature and extent of human impacts. The study
In Ethiopia, a few studies have been done on sites were, therefore, selected to examine the
benthic macroinvertebrates in a few selected relationships between physical features,
rivers. These include benthic macroinvertebrates macrophytes and the macroinvertebrate
as an indicator of water quality in the tropics has communities along this gradient.
been done by Hayal Desta and Seyoum Mengistou The river was sampled at six sites. Among the
(2009) and Getachew Beneberu et al. (2014). six sites, three were from substrate in the water
Assessment of macroinvertebrates in different (sites 3, 5 and 6), while the other three were
water bodies of Ethiopia also done by Harrison located at the edges of the river and covered with
and Hynes (1988); Birnesh Abay (2007); Amanuel macrophytes (sites 1, 2 and 4). The first three sites
Aklilu (2011); Habiba Gashaw and Seyoum (1 – 3) are located at the upstream of the river and
Mengistou (2012). Baye Sitotaw (2006) studied the impacted by different human activities carried out
relation between physicochemical change and in the watershed. The latter three (4 - 6) are located
biological communities in rivers with different at the downstream of the river and are relatively
sources of pollution. Many of these studies less exposed to different stressors. The physical
focused on inventory of the macro-invertebrates in features of the sampling sites are summarized in
relation to water quality changes and few studies Table 1.
mentioned substrate type as important factor in
the dynamics of macroinvertebrate (Hussain, Sampling methods and variables measured
2012). The objective of the study was to look into Benthic macroinvertebrate samples were
the composition and abundance of collected from all six predefined sampling sites
macroinvertebrate in relation to physicochemical (Table 1) from December 2017 to April 2018 based
parameters, substrate and macrophyte cover in on the method outlined in Ontario Benthos
Ketar River. This is the largest river draining into Biomonitoring Network Protocol Manual (Jones et
Lake Ziway from the Arsi mountains (Damtew al., 2007). In macrophyte stand area,
Tufa 2015), and its conservation would impact the macroinvertebrates sampled in the river using
ecological integrity of the lake, which has been standardized D-frame traveling kick sampling
facing increasing deterioration with time (500 μm mesh net) with a horizontal transect. To
(Demelash Wondimagegnehu et al., 2019; Tamiru maintain the consistency of sampling effort, a
Lemi, 2019; Hayal Desta et al., 2015). sample was generally obtained within 30 minutes
at each site and a sampling reach length of 50 m
Materials and Methods was used. But, in sites where there are no
Description of sampling sites macrophytes stand (at substrate), sampling was
The Ketar River originates from the ridges of carried out using Ekman grabs (25 x 15 cm
Kaka, Galama and Chilalo mountains in the south- diameter). Sampling effort was then converted
eastern side of the Ketar-Ziway watershed, named into a common unit of per meter square (m-2) for
after Ketar River and Lake Ziway, and flows in the both sites from macrophytes stand and form
western direction and forms part of Lake Ziway. substrate. In the field, macroinvertebrate samples
The watershed is located within the rift valley were preserved in 10% formalin for later sorting,
between 7.3°and 8.2º North Latitude and 38.9º and and identification and taken to the laboratory of
39.4º’ East Longitude. The Ketar catchment shows Limnology, Addis Ababa University. All the
variations in altitude ranging from around 1646 m organisms in the sample were enumerated and
194 Yadesa Chibsa et al.

identified to the lowest practical taxonomic level 1999; Gooderham & Tysrlin, 2002; Bouchard,
(family level) using a dissecting microscope and 2004).
standard keys (Edmondson, 1959; Jessup et al.,

Table 1. Description of sites along Ketar River used for the collection of samples employed for the analysis of
physico-chemical parameters and macroinvertebrates.

Site GPS location Description

Site 1 8° 1' 52.46'' N The site is exposed to different human activities including agricultural practice that causes
39° 1’ 18.206'' E high runoff and siltation. Dominant macrophytes at the site include Azolla nilotica, Persicaria
1678 m a.s.l senegalensis and Echinochloa stagnina.
Site 2 8° 1' 55.33” N This site is influenced by agricultural inputs and the dominant macrophytes are Azolla nilotica,
39° 1' 13.861 E Nymphoides peltata, Echinochloa stagnina, and Ipomoea aquatica.
1677 m a.s.l
Site 3 8° 1'.57.374'' N No macrophyte stands at this site but it is exposed to different stressors from the riparian. The
39° 1’ 10.52'' E substrate is muddy.
1678 m a.s.l
Site 4 8° 2' 7.976'' N This sampling site is minimally affected by human activities as compared to the other sites
(Reference) 38° 56' 15.648'' E and is well covered with dominant macrophytes such as Azolla nilotica, Pistia stratiotes,
1647 m a.s.l Ludwigia stolonifera and Nymphoides peltata.
Site 5 8° 2' 8.664'' N This downstream backwater site is minimally affected by humans and is not covered by
38° 56' 11.745'' E macrophytes.The substrate is muddy.
1647 m a.s.l
Site 6 8° 2' 6.295'' N This large backwater at the river mouth into Lake Ziway is minimally affected by human
38° 55' 54.408'' E activities and with no macrophyte cover.The substrate is muddy.
1646 m a.s.l.

Data analysis performed DCA gives a gradient length < 3

The structure of the assemblages was assessed standard deviations (S.D.s), implying that taxa
using different diversity indices: richness(S), abundance exhibits linear response to
rarefied richness (ES), abundance (N) and the environmental gradients (ter Braak and Smilauer,
Shannon-Wiener diversity index (H’). ES and H’ 2002). Prior to the ordination analysis, the log
were calculated using PAST (Paleontological (X+1) transformation was performed for the
Statistical) version 6. Analysis of variance (one- environmental variables, while Hellinger
way ANOVA) was used to test for significant transformation (Legendre and Gallagher, 2001)
differences between sites in both diversity indices was applied for the biological data to prevent
and environmental variables and to compare the extreme values (outliers) from unduly influencing
magnitude of macro-invertebrate metrics among the ordination (ter Braak and Smilauer, 2002).
the sampling sites (P < 0.05). ANOVA was run
using SPSS version 20.
Redundancy analysis (RDA) with automatic RESULTS
forward selection using 999 permutations was
Diversity and Abundance of benthic macro-
used to analyze fauna-environment relationships invertebrates
in order to identify environmental factors In this study, a total of 5,450 individuals
potentially influencing macro-invertebrate comprised of 7 orders, 1 class, and 26 taxa were
assemblages. Detrended correspondence analysis collected from all sites. The highest species
(DCA) was used to determine the appropriate richness was recorded at site 4 (18 families)
response model (linear or unimodal) for the whereas, the least species richness were recorded
at sites 3 and 5 (2 families at each site). Sites 1, 2
invertebrate. macroinvertebrate taxa accounting
and 4 were covered with macrophytes and shared
for more than 1% of the total density were
higher abundance and species richness, and site 4
included in the analysis (Choi et al., 2014). The
SINET: ETHIOP. J. SCI., 45(2), 2022 195

showed significant difference (Table 2 and Fig. 1). site showed the highest number of taxa (18), while
The highest total abundance of macroinvertebrate sites 3 and 5 had the lowest values correspond to
was recorded at site 4 (Fig. 1). Site 4, the reference the substrate (2 taxa each) (Table 2).

Table 2. Distribution of macro-invertebrate families among the study sites.

Taxon Order/Class Family

Site 1

Site 2

Site 3

Site 4

Site 5

Site 6
Ephemeroptera (Mayflies) Baetidae + + - + - -
Caenidae + - - + - -
Odonata (Damselflies & Dragonflies) Lebelullidae + + - + - -
Aeshinidae - + - + - -
Lestidae + + - + - -
Coenagrionidae + + - + - -
Hemiptera (Water or true bugs) Belostomatidae + + - + - -
Corixidae + + - - - -
Pleidae + + - + - -
Notonectidae + + - + - -
Diptera (Two winged / True flies) Chironomidae + + + + + +
Culicidae - - - + - -
Ceratopogomidae + - - - - -
Coleoptera (Aquatic Beetles) Dytiscidae + + - + - -
Hydrophilidae + + - + - -
Noteridae + + - - - -
Gastropods Planorbidae + - - + + +
Physidae - - - + - -
Ancylidae - - + - - -
Lymnaeidae - - - + - -
Bivalvia Corbiculidae - - - - - +

Sphaeriidae - + - - - -

Leech - - - + - -
Oligochaeta** Oligochaete* - - - + - -
Total taxon per a site 15 14 2 18 2 3
Note: ** class and * Subclass

Figure 1. Total abundance of macro-invertebrates at each site among the sampling sites.

Among the macro-invertebrates, the Hemiptera and Gastropoda (11.1%). However, the Leech
was the predominant taxon that contributed the (1.50%) and Oligochaeta (0.30%) were represented
largest percentage (35.80%) of the total abundance by relatively low number of specimens (Fig. 2).
followed by Coleoptera (16.70%), Diptera (15.2%),
196 Yadesa Chibsa et al.

Figure 2.The percentage composition in classes of macro-invertebrates identified in Ketar River (Where, Oligocha for
Oligochaete).

The mean Shannon diversity index varied from (Fig. 3 A) to 0.82 (Fig. 3 B) at the substrates, and
0.59 (Fig. 3 B) to 2.13 at the substrates and at the was not significantly different among the sites
bed where covered with macrophytes, (macrophytes stands and substrates). However,
respectively (Fig. 4 A). The values showed both the mean Shannon diversity index and
significant variation between the sampling sites Pielou's evenness index were not showed
(macrophytes stand and substrates); the significant variations between the sites at the beds
macrophytes stand had a higher value than the where covered by macrophyte, and at the
sites at the substrates. Mean Pielou's evenness substrates (Fig. 3).
index ranged from 0.52 at the macrophytes stand

Figure 3. Diversity and evenness indices of macro-invertebrates among the sampling sites down the course of Ketar River.
SINET: ETHIOP. J. SCI., 45(2), 2022 197

Physico-chemical parameters sites (p<0.05). The highest value of EC was

The physico-chemical parameters sampled from recorded at site 6 (262.3), while the minimum
Ketar River for 5 months are presented in table 3. means value recorded at site 3 (P < 0.05). But,
As shown in table 3, the means values of there was no significant difference among sites 1
measured physico-chemical variables in this study to 3. Means of measured DO did not show
showed no significance difference among the sites significantly differences among sites 1 to 3, and
except pH, EC and DO (p<0.05) (Table 3). also from sites 4 to 6 (P < 0.05). But, the values
The measured pH value showed a significant recorded at sites 1 to 3 significantly different from
difference among the study sites (P < 0.05). The sites 4 to 6 (P < 0.05). The maximum value of DO
minimum means values of pH were recorded at was recorded at site 5 (5.98 mg L-1). Even though
sites 2 and 3 (7.89 each site), while the maximum there were slight means differences, the measured
value was 8.25 at site 6 (Table 3). In the same Temperature, TSS, NO-2, NO3, NH4, TP, SRP, and
trend, measured electric conductivity (EC) values SiO2 did not show significant differences among
showed significant differences among the study sites (P < 0.05) (Table 3).

Table 3. Physicochemical variables measured among sites (Mean ± SD) from December 2017 to April 2018.

Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5 Site 6

pH 7.93±0.63ac 7.89±0.14a 7.89±0.24a 8.06±0.13bc 8.04±0.1ac 8.25±0.19d
Temp(0C) 20.73±1a 20.83±1a 21.51±1.42a 21.56±2.64a 21.86±2.23a 21.3±2.11a
EC (K25-μScm-1) 222.3±6.1a 222.96±9.3a 220.86±9.4a 237.08±4b 237.77±3.9b 262.3± 19c
DO (mgL-1) 4.96±0.46a 4.93±0.46a 4.75±0.3a 5.85±0.66b 5.98± 0.74b 5.25± 1.25ab
NO2 (mgL-1) 0.09±0.05a 0.08±0.05a 0.09±0.05a 0.07±0.07a 0.067± 0.06a 0.073±0.05a
NO3 (mgL-1) 0.21±0.06a 0.22±0.05a 0.21± 0.07a 0.21±0.08a 0.2± 0.05a 0.19± 0.04a
NH4 (mgL-1) 0.57±0.07a 0.59±0.13a 0.58±0.06a 0.6±0.17a 0.52± 0.08a 0.53± 0.1a
SiO2 (mgL-1) 0.25±0.03a 0.247±0.05a 0.26± 0.02a 0.27±0.05a 0.25± 0.04a 0.25± 0.04a
TP (μgL-1) 0.68±0.41a 0.43±0.21a 0.41± 0.3a 0.33±0.24a 0.35± 0.43a 0.38± 0.26a
SRP (μgL-1) 0.12±0.05a 0.1±0.16a 0.11± 0.17a 0.13± 0.16a 0.12± 0.14a 0.11± 0.11a
TSS (mg/L) 205.7±104a 165.2±71a 169.7± 67a 130.8± 70a 137.5± 81a 148.4± 62a
NB: Means within a row followed by the same letter are not significantly different (p < 0.05)
Relationships between macroinvertebrates and environmental variables
Redundancy analysis (RDA) indicated that the TSS. Axis I was also positively but strongly
first two axes explained 92.4% of the cumulative associated with SiO2, DO and temperature, while
percentage of variance in species–environmental negatively but strongly correlated with NO2, TP
relationship (Table 4). The first axis, which and TSS. Axis II was also positively but strongly
explained 54.1% of the variance, was positively correlated with NH4 and NO3, while axis II was
correlated with pH, Temperature, EC, DO, NH4, also negatively but strongly correlated with pH,
and SiO2, while the second axis was correlated temperature and EC (Table 4).
positively with NO2, NO3, NH3, SiO2, TP, SRP and

Table 4. Results of redundancy analysis (RDA) of the relationships between macroinvertebrates communities
and environmrntal parameters (strong correlations are marked in boldface figures).

Environmental Variables Axis 1 Axis 2

Eigenvalues: 0.541 0.383
Cumulative percentage variance of species-environment relation: 54.1 92.4
pH 0.3075 -0.5893
Temperature 0.5962 -0.6899
Electric conductivity (EC) 0.2788 -0.6097
DO 0.5922 -0.292
NO2 -0.5616 0.3417
NO3 -0.0257 0.8655
NH4 0.3341 0.8281
SiO2 0.868 0.0937
Total phosphate (TP) -0.7359 0.4062
Soluble reactive phosphate (SRP) -0.4644 0.3175
Total suspended solids (TSS) -0.7974 0.3647
198 Yadesa Chibsa et al.

SiO2, DO and the temperature had a significant and Aeshinidae. On the contrary, axis II had a
positive correlation with axis 1, while NO2, TP and significant positive correlation with NH4 and NO3
TSS had a significant but negative correlation with while significant negative correlation with pH,
axis 1 and these influenced the distribution of temperature and EC influenced the distribution of
Notonectidae, Dystidae, Lestidae, Baetidae, Corixidae, Notoridae, Belostomatidae,
Hydrophilidae, Lymnaeidae, Pleidae, Lebelullidae
1.5 Chironomidae and Planorpidae (Fig. 4).

Baetidae
2 Lestidae
Notonect
Pleidae
NO3 NH3
1
Dystidae 4
Corixida
TP NO2 Hydrophi
notorida TSS SRP
Axis 2

Belostom SiO2

DO

3
EC pH Temp Lymnaeid

Lebelull
65

Chironom Planorpi Aeshinid

-1.5

-1.5 Axis 1 2.0

Figure 4. Redundancy analysis (RDA) tri-plot of dominant macro-invertebrates (>1%) in relation to selected physicochemical
parameters and sites. (Sites abbreviation: 1 – site 1. 2- site 2, 3 – site 3, 4- site 4, 5 – site 5 and 6 – site 6; Species
abbreviation: Aeshinid for Aeshinidae, Belostom forBelostomatidae, Chironom for Chironomidae, Corixida for
Corixidae, Hydrophi for Hydrophilidae, Lebelull for Lebelullidae, Lymnaeid for Lymnaeidae, Notonect for
Notonectidae, Notorida for Notoridae and Planorbi for Planorbidae).

10 orders and 37 families in the upper Awash

River, and 9 orders and 34 families in Wedecha
DISCUSSION River, respectively. The difference of benthic
macroinvertebrate communities in the present
Macroinvertebrate diversity, abundance and study was most probably either due to water
macrophyte cover quality or the differences in study locations and
In this study, macroinvertebrates comprised of 7 duration of the study period.
orders, one class and 23 taxa were collected from From the identified classes of macro-
all the study sites. The highest species richness (18 invertebrates, an order of Insecta, the Hemiptera
families) was recorded at site 4, the site faced families have contributed the largest percentage
minimal human impacts. In the current study, the (35.80%). Similarly, research conducted by Barros
macro-invertebrate communities’ composition et al. (2016) in the River Sinos basin revealed the
was higher when compared to other similar dominance of the community of invertebrates
findings; 6 orders and 11 families by Gurmessa represented by the taxa belonging to the class of
Tessema & Agumassie Tesfahun (2018). However, Insecta. The dominance of Hemiptera families
the present study’s result indicated that fewer might be associated with the morphological and
orders and families compared with the physiological adaptations such as the resistance of
investigation of Ferengi Beksisa et al. (2017) and the eggs, the varied diet under the different life
Sisay Misganaw et al. (2017) which both reported stages, and the presence of wings which make to
disperse that enable them to access food and
SINET: ETHIOP. J. SCI., 45(2), 2022 199

escape from predators (Ruppert and Barnes, 1996). Notonectidae and Corixidae (Predators). Research
Hemipterans are also known for their wide range work conducted by Damanik-Ambarita et al.
of habitats in aquatic ecosystems (Barman and (2016) and Walker et al. (2013) revealed that
Gupta, 2016). Thus, the dominance of the class of macrophytes stand support abundant
Hemiptera in the present study might be communities and promoting the diversity of
associated with their morphological and macroinvertebrates. Thus, the macrophytes stand
physiological adaptations to a broad range of the at the riverside are provide good habitat and need
ecosystem. to be conserved for the maintenance of
Sites covered with macrophytes stands had macroinvertebrate biodiversity along the Ketar
higher abundance and species richness showed River.
significant difference from the sites of no The sites where did not cover by macrophytes
macrophytes coverage (the substrates). Higher (substrates) were represented poorly both in the
abundance and diversity richness recorded at sites total abundance and taxa richness compared with
covered by macrophytes stands also confirmed by the sites covered with macrophytes. The identified
Attrill et al. (2000). Macrophytes provide physical macroinvertebrates in substrates were classified
structure and increase habitat complexity, these under the orders of Diptera (Chinonomidae) and
factors contributed to the high abundance and Gastrods (Acncylidae, Curbiculicidae and
species richness of macroinvertebrates and Planorbidae). Chinonomidae was more abundant
provide shelter for different feeding groups and was presented at all sites in the substrates.
(Thomaz & Cunha, 2010; Habib & Yousuf, 2015; The Ketar River watershed farming system is
Gallardo et al., 2017). Besides, the amount of the characterized by a lack of an appropriate number
macrophytes available for inhabitation also of tillage practices that could cause tedious soil
contributed to the high abundance and diversity and water erosion. Kaller & Hartman (2004) and
richness of macroinvertebrates (Attrill et al., 2000). Richards & Bacon (1994) reported that sediment
Thus, in the present study, the high abundance accumulation in the substrate causes a significant
and species richness of macroinvertebrates might reduction in abundance and diversity of benthic
be associated with the presence of macrophytes macroinvertebrates. Similarly, Larsen et al. (2009;
stands and their complex structure and amount 2011) reported a reduction in the diversity of
available during the sampling times. macroinvertebrates as a result of sediments.
Macroinvertebrate biodiversity is mainly Beside a load of sediment from the watershed,
determined by the number of taxa and macroinvertebrates difference in abundance and
individuals, feeding habits and higher diversity richness along the course could be associated with
can be detected in complex habitats because of water velocity that determines the conditions of
more living space or surface area (Shostell and river ecosystem and habitat condition such as
Williams, 2007). During the study period, good absence of macrophyte and detritus content at a
coverage of aquatic macrophytes has been substrate (Kędzior et al., 2021; Gaskill, 2014).
observed at sites 1 and 2. These two sites were
well equipped by a number of macroinvertebrates Physicochemical parameters and
both in species richness and abundance, relatively. Macroinvertebrate distribution
Site 4 was well covered by macrophytes with the Benthic macroinvertebrates are sensitive to
dominance of Water-lettuce (Pistia stratiotes) environmental change (Bazzanti et al., 2017) and
throughout the study period and was provided quickly respond to various types of environmental
high abundance and diversity of changes such as changes in physical, chemical,
macroinvertebrates than sites 2 and 3. As Wilson and biological conditions in aquatic ecosystems
and Ricciardi (2009) reported, the magnitude of (Odume et al., 2012; Poikane et al., 2016). Similarly,
macroinvertebrate density and diversity is higher in the present study DO, temperature NH4 and
in the site where well covered macrophytes stand. NO3 had a significant positive correlation with
The present study also confirmed that many macroinvertebrates and influenced the
macrophytes stand support greater abundance distribution of macroinvertebrates.
and high taxa number than substrates and The various physicochemical parameters
significantly affect evenness favoring Hemiptera correlated with the abundance of benthic
and the largest abundance of families like
200 Yadesa Chibsa et al.

invertebrates in Ketar River along the study sites significant difference among the study sites and
are list in Table 1. Physicochemical parameters are were the regulating factors for the diversity and
responsible for the diversity richness and spatial abundance of benthic communities. The
distribution of benthic macroinvertebrates. The anthropogenic activities such as agricultural
value of physicochemical parameters such as DO, practice in the catchment and near vicinity of the
pH and other physical parameters seemed to river believed to be the main sources of nitrogen
support the survival of most of the benthic and phosphorous loads (Lohse et al., 2013).
invertebrate communities in Ketar River. Except Agricultural practice in the adjacent to water
pH, DO and EC, the distribution of most of the body could be an exposed stream, river and lake
chemical and physical parameters did not show for sediment load (Suren and Jowett, 2001) and
significant difference among the sampling sites could cause an adverse effect on the
(p<0.05). The TSS and all inorganic nutrients are macroinvertebrate, since sedimentation
decreased along the course Ketar River while, pH, deteriorates water quality, reduce light
Temperature, electrical conductivity (EC) and penetration and fill interstitial spaces in benthic
dissolved oxygen (DO) were relatively increased substrates (Cretaz and Barten, 2007). During the
along the course of the River. present study, intensive agricultural activities
Spatially, pH had significant differences among were undergoing in the adjacent along the Ketar
the sampling site (P < 0.05). The highest value was River. Especially around sites 1 to 3, the river was
recorded at site six (6), where the river enters the directly exposed to different a load of sediment
Lake Ziway. At the entry site, the highest value of came from the nearby agricultural activities.
pH might be associated with deposition of organic Therefore, the abundance and diversity of
sediment in the course of the river (Salmiati et al., macroinvertebrates communities depend on the
2017). integrity of their physical environments live in
Dissolved Oxygen is one of the most substantial (Rempel & Church, 2009).
parameters related to the sustainability of aquatic
life and it determines the spatial and temporal
distribution of aquatic organisms as this is CONCLUSION
essential for their respiration (Araoye, 2009). The
value of DO of the present study ranged from 4.75 In general, this study confirmed that macrophytes
± 0.3 to 0.98 ± 0.74. The value of DO range of 5−14.6 stand support greater abundance and high taxa
mg/L indicates a healthy water body (USEPA, number than substrates, and significantly affect
1998) and is suitable for aquatic life (WHO, 2008). evenness in favoring Hemiptera and the largest
Thus, the presence of DO in all the sampling sites abundance of families like Notonectidae and
may lead to the existence of various types of Corixidae. From the environmental parameters
benthic macroinvertebrates in the study area. recorded in this studied, pH, temperature, electric
Similar to DO, the water temperature has been conductivity, DO, NO2, NO3, NH4, SiO2 and TP
known for its determination of the spatial and were the most important variables explaining the
temporal distribution of aquatic organisms and variation in macroinvertebrate assemblage
benthic communities in particular (Fengqing et al., patterns. It can be recommended that the
2012; Burgmer et al., 2007). Klanderud and Totland conservation of macrophytes can also enhance the
(2005) also stated that temperature affects the conservation of macroinvertebrates, besides the
physiological processes of organisms, and hence role of macrophyte in sediment trapping and
temperature dynamics may change life cycle reducing sedimentation buildup in Lake Ziway,
patterns. In the present study, the recorded mean which has been identified as a serious ecological
value of temperature ranged from 20.73 to 21.86 challenge of Lake Ziway (Alemu Osore et al., 2019;
and had no significant difference among sites. Hayal Desta et al., 2017). Besides, due to limited
This relatively moderate temperature including studies on benthic communities of Ketar River
DO could be induced high benthic organisms in all data for comparison of abundance and diversity
the study sites. patterns is not available. Therefore, the
The major inorganic nutrients recorded in the macroinvertebrates data recorded in the present
present study sites are NO2 and NO3 and TP. In all study will serve as benchmark information for
the sampling sites, all these nutrients had no future studies.
SINET: ETHIOP. J. SCI., 45(2), 2022 201

REFERENCES 12. Basu, A., Sarkar, I., Datta, S., & Roy, S. (2018).
Community structure of benthic
1. Adebayo, A. A., Briski, E., Briski, E., Kalaci, O., macroinvertebrate fauna of river Ichamati,
Hernandez, M., Ghabooli, S. & MacIsaac, H. India. Journal of Threatened Taxa, 10(8): 12044-
J. (2011). Water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) 12055.
and water lettuce (Pistia stratiotes) in the Great 13. Baye Sitotaw (2006). Assessment of benthic-
Lakes: playing with fire? Aquatic Invasions, 6(1): macroinvertebrate structures in relation to
91. environmental degradation in some Ethiopian
2. Adu, B. W., Kemabonta, K. A., &Giwa, O. E. rivers, M.Sc Thesis, School of Graduate
(2016).Study of water quality characteristics Studies, Addis Ababa University.
and benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages of 14. Bazzanti, M., Mastrantuono, L. &Pilotto, F. (2017).
Aahoo stream, Akure, southwestern Depth-related response of macroinvertebrates
Nigeria. Nigeria Journal of Scientific to the reversal of eutrophication in a
Research, 15(3): 499-504. Mediterranean lake: Implications for
3. Alemu Osore, Assefa Melesse, and Bayou Chane ecological assessment. Sciences of the Total
(2019). Estimating the sediment flux and Environment 579: 456- 465.
budget for a data limited rift valley lake in 15. Birnesh Abay (2007). Assessment of downstream
Ethiopia. Hydrology, 6(1): 1. pollution profiles of Awassa textile factory
4. AL-Hadeethi, M. A., Al-Obaidi, B. M., Khalaf, F. K., effluent along Tikur Wuha river using
&Saleh, B. H. (2017).Anatomical Features of physicochemical and macroinvertebrate
(EichhorniaCrassipes(Mart.) Solms) Growing in indicators. M.Sc. Thesis. School of Graduate
Iraq, Dubai (UAE). Studies, Addis Ababa University.
5. Amanuel Aklilu (2011). Water Quality Assessment of 16. Bouchard, R.W. (2004). Guide to aquatic
Eastern shore of Lake Hawassa Using macroinvertebrates of the upper Midwest.
Physicochemical Parameters and Benthic Macro- Water resources center, University of
invertebrates. M.Sc Thesis, Addis Ababa Minnesota, St. Paul, MN.208 pp.
University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia 68pp. 17. Cheruvelil, K. S., Soranno, P. A., Madsen, J. D., &
6. Araoye, P. A. (2009). The seasonal variation of pH and Roberson, M. J. (2002). Plant architecture and
dissolved oxygen (DO2) concentration in Asa epiphytic macroinvertebrate communities: the
lake Ilorin, Nigeria. International Journal of role of an exotic dissected macrophyte. Journal
Physical Sciences, 4(5): 271-274. of the North American Benthological Society, 21(2):
7. Arimoro, O.F., Ikomi, B.R. & Iwegbue, A.M. (2007) 261-277.
Water Quality Changes in Relation to Diptera 18. Choi, J. Y., Jeong, K. S., Kim, S. K., La, G. H., Chang,
Community Patterns and Diversity Measured K. H., &Joo, G. J. (2014). Role of macrophytes
at an Organic Effluent Impacted Stream in as microhabitats for zooplankton community
the Niger Delta, Nigeria. Ecological Indicators, in lentic freshwater ecosystems of South
7: 541-552. Korea. Ecological informatics, 24, 177-185.
8. Attrill, M. J., Strong, J. A., & Rowden, A. A. (2000). 19. Cretaz, A.L. & Barten, P.K. ( 2007). Land use effects
Are macroinvertebrate communities onstream flow and water quality in the
influenced by seagrass structural northeastern UnitedStates, CRC Press, Boca
complexity?. Ecography, 23(1): 114-121. Raton, FL, 319 p.
9. Baker, K., Chadwick, M. A., Wahab, R. A., &Kahar, R. 20. Czerniawska-Kusza, I. (2004). Use of artificial
(2017).Benthic community structure and substrates for sampling benthic
ecosystem functions in above-and below- macroinvertebrates in the assessment of water
waterfall pools in Borneo. Hydrobiologia, 787(1): quality of large lowland rivers. Polish Journal of
307-322. Environmental Studies, 13(5): 579-584..
10. Barman, B., & Gupta, S. (2016). Assemblage of 21. Damanik-Ambarita, M. N., Everaert, G., Forio, M. A.
coleoptera and hemiptera community in a E., Nguyen, T. H. T., Lock, K., Musonge, P. L.
stream of Chakrashila Wildlife Sanctuary in S., ... & Goethals, P. L. (2016). Generalized
Assam. Tropical Ecology, 57(2):243-253. linear models to identify key
11. Barros, M. P., Gayeski, L. M., &Tundisi, J. G. (2016). hydromorphological and chemical variables
Benthic macroinvertebratecommunity in the determining the occurrence of
Sinos river drainage basin, Rio Grande doSul, macroinvertebrates in the Guayas river basin
Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Biology, 76(4): 942- (Ecuador). Water, 8(7): 297.
950. 22. Damtew Tufa, Abbulu, Y., & Rao, G. V. R. (2015).
Hydrological impacts due to land-use and
202 Yadesa Chibsa et al.

land-cover changes of Ketar watershed, Lake review. Journal of Entomology and Zoology
Ziway catchment, Ethiopia. Int. J. Civ. Eng Studies, 3(6): 377-384.
Tech, 6: 36-45. 34. Habiba Gashaw & Seyoum Mengistu (2012).
23. Demelash Wondimagegnehu, Absi, R., Ledésert, B., Ecological assessment of Lake Hora, Ethiopia,
Dufour F. & Alemseged Tamiru (2019). using benthic and weed-bed fauna. Momona
Impact of water abstraction on the water level Ethiopian Journal of Science 4(2): 3-15.
of Lake Ziway, Ethiopia. Water and Society 35. Harrison, A., & Hynes, H. (1988). Benthic fauna of
V, 239, 67. Ethiopian mountain streams and rivers. Archiv
24. deNadaï‐Monoury, E., Gilbert, F., &Lecerf, A. (2014). fuer Hydrobiologie, Supplement, 81(1): 1-36.
Forest canopy cover determines invertebrate 36. Hayal Desta & Seyoum Mengistou (2009). Water
diversity and ecosystem process rates in quality parameters and macroinvertebrates
depositional zones of headwater index of biotic integrity of the Jimma wetlands,
streams. Freshwater Biology, 59(7): 1532-1545. Southwestern Ethiopia. J. Wetlands Ecol. 3: 77-
25. Durães, L., Roque, F. O., Siqueira, T., Santos, A. M., 93.
Borges, M. A., &Rezende, R. S. (2016). 37. Hayal Desta, Brook Lemma, & Ephrem
Simulating the role of connectivity in shaping Gebremariam (2017). Identifying sustainability
stream insect metacommunities under challenges on land and water uses: The case of
colonization cycle dynamics. Ecological Lake Ziway watershed, Ethiopia. Applied
Modelling, 334: 19-26. Geography, 88: 130-143.
26. Edmondson, W.T. (1959). Fresh water biology. 2nd 38. Hayal Desta, Brook Lemma, Albert, G., &
ed. John Wiley and Sons Inc. New York, USA. Stellmacher, T. (2015). Degradation of Lake
27. Ferengi Beksisa, Aschalew Lakew A, Prabha D and Ziway, Ethiopia: A study of the
Wolfram G (2017). Macro Invertebrate environmental perceptions of school
Communities in the spring and Stream Sites of students. Lakes & Reservoirs: Research &
Upper Awash River at Chilimo, Ethiopia. Management, 20(4): 243-255.
Innovative Techniques in Agriculture, 1(3): 141- 39. Heino, J., Melo, A. S., & Bini, L. M. (2015).
151. Reconceptualising the beta
28. Gallardo, L. I., Carnevali, R. P., Porcel, E. A., & Poi, diversity‐environmental heterogeneity
A. S. G. (2017). Does the effect of aquatic plant relationship in running water
types on invertebrate assemblages change systems. Freshwater Biology, 60(2): 223- 235.
across seasons in a subtropical wetland?. 40. Hopkins, P.S., Kratz, K.W. & Cooper, S.D.
29. Gaskill, J. A. (2014). Examining the effects of pH and (1989).Effects of an experimental acid pulse
macrophyte diversity on benthic on invertebrates in a high altitude Sierra
macroinvertebrate assemblages in Adirondack Nevada stream.Hydrobiologia. 171: 45–58.
Lakes. Honors Theses. 35. 41. Hussain, Q. A. (2012). Macroinvertebrates in
https://digitalcommons.esf.edu/honors/35 streams: A review of some ecological
30. Getachew Beneberu, Seyoum Mengistou, factors. International Journal of Fisheries and
Eggermont, H., & Verschuren, D. (2014). Aquaculture, 4(7): 114-123.
Chironomid distribution along a pollution 42. Hussner, Heidbuechel & Heiligtag. (2014).
gradient in Ethiopian rivers, and their Vegetative overwintering and viable seed
potential for biological water quality production explain the establishment of
monitoring. African Journal of Aquatic Science invasive Pistia stratiotes in the thermally
39(1): 45-56. abnormal Erft River (North Rhine-Westphalia,
31. Gooderham, J. & Tysrlin, E. (2002). The water bug Germany). Aquatic Botany, 119: 28-32.
book. A guide to the freshwater 43. Jessup, B.K., Markowitz, A. & Stribling, J.B. (1999).
macroinvertebrates of temperate Australia. Family-level key to the stream invertebrates of
Csiro publishing. available at: Maryland and surrounding areas. Maryland
www.publish.csiro.au. department of natural resources Chesapeake
32. Gurmessa Tessema & Agumassie Tesfahun (2018). Bay and watershed program resource
Assessment of Benthic Macro-invertebrate assessment service monitoring and non-tidal
Communities in Relation to Water Quality in assessment division CBWP-MANTA-EA-99-2.
Teltele Stream, Ambo West Showa, Ethiopia 44. Jones, C., Somers, K., Craig, B., & Reynoldson, T.
33. Habib, S., & Yousuf, A. R. (2015). Effect of (2007). Ontario Benthos Biomonitoring
macrophytes on phytophilous Network: Protocol Manual. Ontario Ministry of
macroinvertebrate community: A Environmental Biomonitoring Section, Queen’s
Printer for Ontario, Canada.
SINET: ETHIOP. J. SCI., 45(2), 2022 203

45. Kaller, M. D., & Hartman, K. J. (2004).Evidence of a 55. Quintão, J. M. B., Rezende, R. S., &Júnior, J. F. G.
threshold level of fine sediment (2013). Microbial effects in leaf breakdown in
accumulation for altering benthic tropical reservoirs of different trophic
macroinvertebrate communities. Hydrobiologia, status. Freshwater Science, 32(3): 933-950.
518 (1- 3): 95-104. 56. Rempel, L.L. & Church, M. (2009).Physical and
46. Kędzior, R., Kłonowska-Olejnik, M., Dumnicka, E., ecologicalresponse to disturbance by gravel
Woś, A., Wyrębek, M., Książek, L. & Skalski, mining in a large alluvialriver. Can. J. Fish.
T. (2021). Macroinvertebrate habitat Aquat.Sci. 66: 52–71.
requirements in rivers: overestimation of 57. Rezende, R. D. S., Leite, G. F. M., De‐Lima, A. K. S.,
environmental flow calculations in incised Silva Filho, L. A. B. D., Chaves, C. V. C., Prette,
rivers. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences A. C. H., & GonçalvesJúnior, J. F. (2015). Effects
Discussions, 1-18. of density and predation risk on leaf litter
47. Kouamé, M. K., Dietoa, M. Y., Edia, E. O., Da Costa, processing by P hylloicus sp. Austral
S. K., Ouattara, A., & Gourène, G. (2011). Ecology, 40(6): 693-700.
Macroinvertebrate communities associated 58. Richards, C., & Bacon, K. L. (1994). Influence of fine
with macrophyte habitats in a tropical man- sediment on macroinvertebrate colonization of
made lake (Lake Taabo, Côte surface and hyporheic stream substrates. The
d’Ivoire). Knowledge and Management of Great Basin Naturalist, 106- 113.
Aquatic Ecosystems, (400), 03.
59. Ruppert, E. E., & Barnes, R. D. (1996). Invertebrate
48. Larsen, S., Pace, G., & Ormerod, S. J. (2011). Zoology. 6th Ed. Saunders College
Experimental effects of sediment deposition on Publishing, Ft. Worth, Texas, p. 104.
the structure and function of
60. Salmiati, N. Z. A., & Salim, M. R. (2017). Integrated
macroinvertebrate assemblages in temperate
approaches in water quality monitoring for
streams. River Research and Applications, 27(2):
river health assessment: scenario of Malaysian
257-267.
River. Water Quality, 315.
49. Larsen, S., Vaughan, I. P., & Ormerod, S. J. (2009).
61. Shostell, J. M., & Williams, B. S. (2007). Habitat
Scale‐dependent effects of fine sediments on
complexity as a determinate of benthic
temperate headwater invertebrates. Freshwater
macroinvertebrate community structure in
Biology, 54(1): 203-219.
cypress tree reservoirs. Hydrobiologia, 575(1),
50. Legendre, P., & Gallagher, E. D. (2001). Ecologically 389-399.
meaningful transformations for ordination of
62. Sisay Misganaw, Seyoum Leta & Seyoum Mengistu
species data. Oecologia, 129(2): 271-280.
(2017). Correlation study of some physico-
51. Lohse, A., Sanderman, J. &Amundson (2013). chemical parameters and benthic
Identifying sources and processes influencing macroinvertebrates metrics on the ecological
nitrogen export to a small stream using dual impacts of floriculture industries along
isotopes of nitrate. Water Resour. Res., Vol. 49, Wedecha River, Debrezeit, Ethiopia. Journal of
Pp. 5715–5731. Coastal Life Medicine, 5(10): 433-440.
52. Nelson, J. W., Kadlec, J. A., &Murkin, H. R. (1990). 63. Suren, A.M. & Jowett, I.G. (2001). Effects of
Responses by macroinvertebrates to cattail deposited sediment on invertebrate drift: an
litter quality and timing of litter submergence experimental study. N. Z. J. Mar. Freshwater
in a northern prairie marsh. Wetlands, 10(1): Res. 35: 725–737.
47-60.
64. Tamiru Lemi (2019). Threats and Opportunities of
53. Odume, O. N., Muller, W. J., Arimoro, F. O., & Central Ethiopia Rift Valley
Palmer, C. G. (2012). The impact of water Lakes. International Journal of Environmental
quality deterioration on macroinvertebrate Sciences & Natural Resources, 22(2): 52 - 62.
communities in the Swartkops River, South
65. TerBraak, C. J., & Smilauer, P. (2002). CANOCO
Africa: a multimetric approach. African Journal
reference manual and CanoDraw for Windows
of Aquatic Science, 37(2): 191-200.
user's guide: software for canonical community
54. Poikane, S., Johnson, R. K., Sandin, L., Schartau, A. ordination (version 4.5). www. canoco. com.
K., Solimini, A. G., Urbanič, G., ... & Böhmer, J.
66. Thomaz, S. M., & Cunha, E. R. D. (2010). The role of
(2016). Benthic macroinvertebrates in lake
macrophytes in habitat structuring in aquatic
ecological assessment: a review of methods,
ecosystems: methods of measurement, causes
intercalibration and practical
and consequences on animal assemblages'
recommendations. Science of the total
composition and biodiversity. Acta Limnologica
environment, 543: 123-134.
Brasiliensia, 22(2): 218-236.
204 Yadesa Chibsa et al.

67. Villamagna, A. M. (2009). Ecological effects of water 70. Walker, P. D., Wijnhoven, S., & van der Velde, G.
hyacinth (Eichhorniacrassipes) on Lake (2013). Macrophyte presence and growth
Chapala, Mexico. PhD Thesis. Virginia form influence macroinvertebrate community
Polytechnic Institute and State University, structure. Aquatic Botany, 104, 80-87.
Blacksburg, Virginia, USA, 195pp. 71. WHO (World Health Organization,
68. Villamagna, A., & Murphy, B. (2010). Ecological and 2008).”Guidelines for drinking water quality.
socio‐economic impacts of invasive water World Health Organization, Geneva.
hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes): a review. 72. Wilson, S. J., & Ricciardi, A. (2009). Epiphytic
Freshwater biology. 55(2): 282-298. macroinvertebrate communities on Eurasian
69. Vyas, V., & Bhawsar, A. (2013). Benthic community watermilfoil (Myriophyllumspicatum) and
structure in Barna stream network of Narmada native milfoils Myriophyllumsibericum and
River basin. International Journal of Myriophyllumalterniflorum in eastern North
Environmental Biology, 3(2): 57-63. America. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and
Aquatic Sciences, 66(1): 18-30.