Research Article
Open Access
The Effect of Drying of Urmia Lake on Community
Structure and Species Diversity of Waterbirds in
Kaniborazan Wetland, 1995, 2005, and 2015
Behrouz Behrouzi-Rad*
*Department of Environment, Wildlife Ecology specialist and ornithologist, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources,
Islamic Azad University, Ahvaz Branch, Tehran, Iran.
*Corresponding author: Behrouz Behrouzi-Rad, Department of Environment, Wildlife Ecology specialist and ornithologist, College of Agriculture
and Natural Resources, Islamic Azad University, Ahvaz Branch, Tehran, Iran; E-mail:
@
Received: April 29, 2019; Accepted: May 08, 2019; Published: May 13, 2019
Citation: Behrouzi-Rad B (2019) The Effect of Drying of Urmia Lake on Community Structure and Species Diversity of Waterbirds in Kaniborazan Wetland, 1995, 2005, and 2015. Int J Marine Biol Res 4(2): 1-9.
DOI:
10.15226/24754706/4/2/00134
Dryness effects of Lake Urmia on water birds population and
species diversity changes carried out by total count method in 1995,
2005 and 2015. Thirty three water birds species with a population
5576 individuals counted in 1995(water level of Lake Uromia was
1277.96 masl and the area of wetland was 907 hectare, 23 water
birds species with a population 2363 individuals counted in 2005,
(water level of Lake Urmia was 1273.41masl, area of Kaniborazan
was 600 hectare, 17 water birds species (11species were swimmer
waterbirds and 6 species were waders and wading birds) with a
population 660 individuals counted in 2015,(south part of lake Urmia
was dried completely and depth of north part of the lake was less than
one meter, water level of lake Urmia was 1270.1 masl and area of
the Kaniborazan was 200 hectare). Comparison of number of water
birds and number of species in three years showed the water bird’s
population and number of species declined. The species reduction was
41%, and population reduction was 88%. β diversity was 0.24, 0.38,
and 0.43 in 1995, 2005 and 2015 respectively. Species diversity was
28, 23, and 17 in 1995, 2005 and 2015 respectively, and γ diversity
was 33. Margalef’s index were 3.36, 3.09 and 2.47, Fisher-Alpha index
were 4.16, 3.90 , 0.19 and Simpsons evenness were 0.31,0.47 and 0.49
in 1995,2005 and 2015 respectively. Comparison of diversity indices
showed that they reduced, and dominance and evenness indices
decreased in three years. The main reason was drying effects of Lake
Urmia on the Kaniborazan Wetlands Ecosystem.
Keywords: Lake Urmia; water birds Population changes; Species
diversity; Kaniborazan; Iran;
Water birds are one of the most important indicators of
the suitability and management of changes in wetland habitats
[15]. Diversity variations, populations, biodiversity indices and
waterbird density, are an appropriate index in determining the
health status of the ecosystems of the wetlands, [10,14]. Therefore,
the study of changes in the diversity and density of waterbirds
in different years can serve as an indicator of the health status
or threats in the ecosystems of the wetlands [23]. On the other
hand, Iranian wetlands in West Asia are very important for the
survival of waterbirds [27]. The wetlands of southern Lake Urmia
in Iran are more important in spring and summer [2,7]. Because
other wetlands of Iran are hotter in spring and summer than
wetlands at south of Lake Urmia, while wetlands of south of Lake
Urmia are more suitable habitat for the presence of waterbirds
[7]. Therefore, they are of more importance to maintain the
populations of migratory water birds, chicks, and resident water
birds [27]. Due to this, the wetlands of the southern Urmia Lake are
considered as sensitive habitats [7], especially the Kaniborazan
wetland, which globally threatened species such as White-headed
Duck Oxyura leucocephala and Marbled Duck Marmaroneta
angostirostris (IUCN, 2010). They were reproducing in these
wetlands [1,2,4]. Also, they are a sensitive habitat for protected
water birds species in Iran such as White Stork Ciconia ciconia
and Herons, which are located on the outskirts of Lake Urmia
[7]. After drying of Lake Urmia, wetlands in south of Lake Urmia
have played a greater role in protecting waterbirds dependent on
the ecosystems of Lake Urmia, and the only sources of nutrition
of these species are wetlands at south of the lake such as the
Kaniborazan wetland. The Kaniborazan wetland with the Lake
Urmia has a hydrological and ecological relationship [11]. The
Mahabad River first pours into the Kaniborazan wetland. In the
wet years, the wetland flows into Lake Urmia [3,4]. Regarding
the habitat values due to the nature of the Lake Urmia with the
Kaniborazan, the breeding species of waterbirds in Urmia Lake
such as Grater Flamingo Pheonicopterus ruber and White Pelican
Pelecanus onocratolus with their newly-hatched chicks come
to Kaniborazan for feeding and use security [1,2,3,6]. After the
chicks fledged, they leave the area to wintering habitats [7]. At
the time of the presence in the Kaniborazan wetland, if they
threaten by natural or human factors, they will take refuge in
Lake Urmia. In fact, the survival of waterbirds depends on the
survival of the Kaniborazan wetland and Lake Urmia. Survival of
the wetland and Lake Urmia is also tied to the amount of water
received. A review of the published articles showed that so far no
study has been performed on the water birds of the Kaniborazan
wetland due to the drying of Lake Urmia, only its waterbirds are
counted in the winter along with other wetlands in the West
Azarbaijan province [11,12]. Due to the drying of Urmia lake in
recent years [1,2,4,6,7,16,25,26,27]., its ecological functions have
been changed and caused the collapse of the colony of breeding
water birds of Urmia Lake [7] and the waterbirds of the southern
wetlands of lake Urmia, including the Kaniborazan wetland.
These changes and population fluctuations of the waterbirds of
the Kaniboarazan wetland are, as an indicator of the quality and
ecological function of the Kaniborazan wetland. The purpose of
this study was to investigate the effect of drying of Urmia Lake on
Kaniborazan wetland by comparing the biodiversity indicators of
water birds in the wetland in 1995 wet year, 2005 low water and
in 2015, the dry year (South of Lake Urmia was quite dry and the
Kaniborazan wetland has very low water in 2015).
Study Area
The Kaniborazan wetland is located 30 kilometers north of
Mahabad City, south of Lake Urmia, in the geographical position
36o59’32”N450o46’39”E [3] figure 1. Its area was 907 hectares in
the wet years, decreases to about 200 hectares during dryness, or
sometimes it is completely dry [21] figure 2. The altitude is 1375
meters from sea level. Depth of water has been decreased from
120 centimeters to 40 centimeters in 2015 [3]. The Kaniborazan
wetland is managed by the Department of Environment of Iran
as the protected area, and is the first place for bird watching in
West Azarbaijan Province [3,12]. It has been registered in Ramsar
sites as an international importance wetland. Based on the
classification of the Ramsar Convention, it is in the Palustrine fresh
water wetlands group, [24]. From the springs of Ghareh-Dagh,
Khor-Khore villages, the surface waters, and part of Mahabad
River receive water. There is an ecological and hydrological
relationship with Lake Urmia. Drying of Urmia Lake is effective
on the environment of Kaniborazan wetland. In the rainy time of
Urmia Lake, its water entered the wetland, and in the rainy days
of the wetland, the water overflowed into the lake [12]. There are
45 plant species of 35 genera and 17 families in the Kaniborazan
wetland, which make up 21 plant communities. Important plants
around the wetland include the Chenopodiaceae and Graminae
grasses. Plants exited from water such as Typha sp, phragmites
sp, cerax sp, scirpus sp and immersion such as Ceratophyllum sp
and halophyte and dominant species between wetland and lake
of Urmia, are Tamarix sp, Alhaji camelus, Salicornia sp, Suaeda sp
[21].
Figure 1:Location of Kaniborazan at south of Lake Urmia (Google earth 2015)
Figure 2:Natural features of the Kaniborazan wetland in December 2015
Data collection
The count of water birds was done according to the advice of Wetland International using the Total Count method [28]. The (WI) has been using this method since 1968 in the world's wetlands for the census of water birds. In Iran, the Department of Environment has been using this method since 1969 for counting water birds in wetlands. For these reason water birds of the Kaniboarazan wetland were counted on September 10, 1995, September 13, 2005, and September 12, 2015 by direct counting of total count method with 40×10 Zeiss binocular and 15×60 telescopes. The counts lasted from 7 am to 12 noon. Water birds were identified using the Field Guide to the Asian Water birds [9] Biodiversity indices, alpha, beta and gamma diversity [29]; waterbirds of the Kaniborazan wetland using Past software [18] and Ecological Methodology [19] are calculated with the following Formulas. The biodiversity indicators calculated in this study were Shanon-Winnier
, Simpson
Dominance
, Margalef and Menhinick richness
,
Species evenness
, Berger-Parker evenness
, Brillouin
, Equitability
, Fisher-alpha S= αln(1+n/α), alpha, beta, and gamma diversity have been used by [29], α Diversity is the variety of species found in a community, habitat, or specific ecosystem, β diversity
and γ diversity is the richness of a range of habitats in a geographic region and percentage similarity coefficient and Euclidean difference measured with Past Software [18] Globally threatened species distinguished by the IUCN 2015 criteria's, and protected species in Iran are distinguished by rules of Department of Environment of Iran [10]. The meteorological information of the area has been extracted from the site of the West Azerbaijani Meteorological Office [13].
In the Kaniborazan wetland in 1995 (wet year), 5576 birds
were counted belong to 28 species. In 2015, 660 waterbirds were
counted from 17 species. The population declined by 88% and the
number of species decreased by 39%. The south of Lake Urmia
was completely dry in 2015, and the wetland was very small. The
trend of waterbirds populations of the Kaniborazan wetland has
been decreased from 1995 to 2015. (The number of waterbirds
in three years was: (5576>2363>660) respectively. The decrease
in the number of waterbirds in 2005 in comparison with 1995
was 57% and in 2015 compared to 1995 was 88%. The number
of species of waterbirds in 1995 was 28; in 2015 it decreased to
17 species. Reduction was 39% (28>23>17). The total density of
waterbirds decreased by 89% in 2015 compared to 1995. The
decrease in shore birds in 2015 compared to the 1995 was less
than the decrease in swimmer waterbirds. Reduction of shore
birds was 50%. Changes in population and number of species
of waterbirds in three years in table 1, biodiversity indices of
waterbirds in the kaniborazan in table 2, variation of alpha , beta,
and gama diversity has been showed in table 3, and the number
of each counted species has been showed in three years in table
4.
Table 1:Changes in the number and density of water birds in 1995, 2005, and 2015 in Kaniborazan wetland Area of the wetland was 907 hectare and depth of it was 120 Centimeter in 1995. Area of the wetland was 300 hectare and depth of it was 60 Centimeter in 2005. Area of the wetland was
200 hectare and depth of it was 40 centimeter in 2015.
Birds Group |
1995 |
2005 |
2015 |
Reduction Percent |
Species number of swimmer waterbirds |
20 |
15 |
11 |
Reduction:25% and 45% |
Population of swimmer waterbirds |
4929 |
1736 |
334 |
Reduction: 65% and 93% |
Density per hectare of swimmer waterbirds |
5.43 |
1.91 |
0.36 |
Reduction: 65% and 93% |
Number of shore birds |
8 |
8 |
6 |
Stable and reduction: 25% |
Population of shore birds |
647 |
627 |
326 |
Reduction: 3% and 50% |
Density per hectare of shore birds |
0.71 |
0.69 |
0.24 |
Reduction: 3% and 66% |
Total number of waterbirds |
5576 |
2363 |
660 |
Reduction: 41% and 88% |
Density per hectare of all waterbirds |
6.12 |
2.60 |
0.71 |
Reduction: 57% and 89 % |
Species number of all waterbirds |
28 |
23 |
17 |
Reduction : 18% and 39% |
Table 2:Biodiversity indicators of water birds in Kaniborazan, 1995, 2005, and 2015
Biodiversity indices |
1995 |
2005 |
2015 |
status |
Taxa-S |
28 |
23 |
17 |
Reduced |
Individuals |
5576 |
2363 |
660 |
Reduced |
Dominance-D |
0.15 |
0.16 |
0.18 |
Increased |
Simpson-1-D |
0.85 |
0.83 |
0.82 |
Reduced |
Shannon-H |
2.23 |
2.17 |
2 |
Reduced |
Evenness-e^H/S |
0.31 |
0.47 |
0.48 |
Increased |
Brillouin |
2.21 |
2.44 |
1.95 |
Reduced |
Menhinick |
0.66 |
0.51 |
0.41 |
Increased |
Margalef |
3.36 |
3.09 |
2.47 |
Reduced |
Equitability |
0.65 |
0.76 |
0.77 |
Increased |
Fisher-alpha |
4.16 |
3.9 |
0.19 |
Reduced |
Berger-Parker |
0.29 |
0.28 |
0.22 |
Reduced |
Chao-1 |
28 |
23 |
17 |
Reduced |
Table 3:Alpha, beta, and gamma diversity of waterbirds in Kaniborazan three years, 1995.2005 1nd 2015
Beta Diversity |
1995-2005 |
2005-2015 |
1995-2015 |
Status |
Wittaker |
0.24 |
0.38 |
0.43 |
Increased |
Harison |
0.007 |
0.02 |
0.018 |
Increased |
Wilson-Shimda |
4.64 |
3.61 |
3.57 |
Reduced |
Alpha Diversity |
28 |
25 |
17 |
Reduced |
Gama Diversity |
|
34 |
|
|
Table 4:Changes in the number of waterbirds counted in the Kaniborazan wetland in September, 1995, 2005, and 2015 the percent reduction or increase is compared to 1995, because in 1995, Lake Urmia and the Kaniboarazan wetland were in normal condition. The numbers inside the
Parentheses are the number of species
Species |
1995 |
2055 |
2015 |
Status % |
Little Grebe Tachibaptus ruficollis |
12 |
8 |
5 |
Reduced 43% and 59% |
Great Crested Grebe Podiceps cristatus |
170 |
0 |
0 |
Reduced 100% |
Pygmy Cormorant Phalacocrocax pygmeus |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Increased 100% |
Great White Pelican Pelecanus onocrotalus |
6 |
0 |
0 |
Reduced 100% |
Graylag Goose Anser anser |
21 |
0 |
0 |
Reduced 100% |
Greater Flamingo Phoenicopterus ruber |
6 |
0 |
0 |
Reduced 100% |
Marbled Teal Marmaroneta angustirostris |
12 |
8 |
6 |
Reduced 43% and 50% |
White-headed Duck Oxyura leucocephala |
6 |
6 |
0 |
Stable and reduced 100% |
Mallard Anas platyrhynchos |
180 |
110 |
14 |
Reduced 39% and 92% |
Common Pochard Aythya ferina |
234 |
124 |
0 |
Reduced 47% and 100% |
Gadwall Anas strepera |
12 |
3 |
0 |
Reduced 75% and 100% |
Ruddy Shelduck Tadorna ferruginea |
6 |
0 |
0 |
Reduced 100% |
Teal Anas crecca |
1234 |
120 |
15 |
Reduced 90% and 98% |
European Wigeon Anas penelope |
45 |
150 |
0 |
Increased 70% and reduced 100% |
Common Shelduck Tadorna tadorna |
45 |
11 |
0 |
Reduced75% and 100% |
Duck sp |
1000 |
230 |
0 |
Reduced 77% and 100% |
Coot Fulica atra |
1211 |
662 |
72 |
Reduced 45% and 94% |
Moorhen Gallinula chloropus |
34 |
8 |
2 |
Reduced 76% and 94% |
Black-headed Gull Larus ridibundus |
85 |
35 |
24 |
Reduced 59% and 72% |
Slender-billed Gull Larus genei |
11 |
7 |
4 |
Reduced 26% and 63% |
Herring Gull Larus argentatus |
56 |
43 |
6 |
Reduced 23% and 89% |
White-winged Black Tern Childonias Leucopterus |
543 |
211 |
185 |
Reduced 61% and 66% |
21 species Swimmer waterbirds |
(20)4939 |
(915)1736 |
(11)334 |
Reduced 65% and 94% |
Little Egret Egrta garzetta |
12 |
34 |
134 |
Increased 65% and 91% |
Grey Heron Ardea cinerea |
21 |
18 |
43 |
Reduced 14%,Increased51% |
Squcca Heron Ardeola raloides |
13 |
14 |
0 |
Increased 7% Reduced100% |
White Stork Ciconia ciconia |
6 |
145 |
123 |
Increased 96% and 95% |
Lapwing Vanellus vanellus |
500 |
145 |
2 |
Reduced 71 and 99% |
Spur-winged Plover Vanellus duvaucelli |
0 |
0 |
2 |
Increased 100% |
Black-winged Stilt Himantopus himantopus |
34 |
18 |
12 |
Reduced 47% and 65% |
Pied Avocet ricurvirostera avocetta |
4 |
0 |
0 |
Reduced 100% |
Sandpiper Tringa sp |
45 |
227 |
0 |
Increased 80% and Reduced 100% |
Redshank Tringa tetanus |
0 |
14 |
0 |
Increased 100% and Reduced 100% |
Green Sandpiper Tringa ocropus |
0 |
12 |
0 |
Increased 100% and Reduced 100% |
Little Stint Caldris minuta |
12 |
0 |
0 |
Reduced 100% |
Total of shore birds |
|
(8)627 |
(8)647 |
Reduced 3% and 50% |
Total of all waterbirds |
|
(23)2363 |
(28)5576 |
Reduced 41% and 88% |
Similarity and Euclidean difference coefficient for waterbirds
of the Kanioerazan wetland
Table 5 shows the similarity and Euclidean difference
coefficients of waterbirds of the Kaniborazan wetland in three
years, 1995, 2005, and 2015. Table 5 shows that the most
similarity between waterbirds in the Kaniborazan wetland was
between 2005 and 1995 (66%) and the lowest similarity between
2015 and 1995 (30%). For this reason, Euclidean’s greatest
difference (356) was between 2015 and 1995.
Table 5:Similarity and Euclidean difference coefficients of water birds of the Kaniborazan wetland in 1995, 2005, and 2015
Year |
1995 |
2005 |
2015 |
Euclidean distance |
1995 |
000 |
|
|
2005 |
270 |
000 |
|
2015 |
356 |
126 |
000 |
Similarity |
1995 |
000 |
|
|
2005 |
66 |
000 |
|
2015 |
30 |
37 |
000 |
Hydrology of the Kaniborazan Wetland
The rainfall data from the Pole Sorkh Abad Station of
Mahabad city has been received. This station is located after the
dam of Mahabad. Water flows from the dam to the Kaniborazan
wetland. This station is located after Mahabad Dam. Water flows
by Mahabad River from the dam to the Kaniborazan wetland.
The rainfall was 317 mm in 1995, the area of the wetland in
that year was 907 hectares, its depth was about 150 cm, and the
average depth of the wetland was 1 meter. Therefore, under wet
conditions in the wetland, its volume is estimated at 907 million
cubic meters. The rainfall was 164 mm in 2005, the maximum
depth of the wetland was 1 m, the average depth was 50 cm, and
the volume of water in the wetland in that year was 450 million
cubic meters. The rainfall was 302 mm in 1394, but the maximum
depth of water in 2015 was about 40 cm and the average depth
was about 40 cm table 6. Despite rising rainfall in 2015, the
depth of the wetland has decreased, which results from water
harvesting upstream of the wetland. So the volume of water in the
wetland in this year was 181 million cubic meters. Correlation
coefficients between wet and dry years with the number and
diversity of waterbirds indicate that the diversity and number
of waterbirds has a significant relationship with water content,
area, and depth of the wetland. Variation and the density and
number of birds show a significant difference among 1995, 2005
and 2015, table 7.
Table 7 shows there is a correlation of 0.507 between the
depth and area of the wetland with the number of swimmer
waterbirds and shore birds, and correlation is 0.44 with a total
population of waterbirds and depth and area of the wetland. Also,
the area and depth of the wetland with the number of species,
and the population of swimmer waterbirds, and the number
of species and populations of shore birds were in the range of
(-0.125), (-166.0), (-0.12) , (-0.37) and (-0.24) have a negative
relationship. These numbers indicate that the depth and the area
of the wetland has decreased, the number and population of birds
has also decreased. Figures 3 and 4 also confirm this mater. By
decreasing the area of the Kaniborazan wetland, the number of
waterbirds has decreased, and with the decrease in the depth
of the wetland, the number of species of waterbirds has also
decreased
Table 6:Area, depth and number of waterbirds in the Kaniborazan wetland in 1995, 2005, and 2015
Year |
Wetland area |
Average depth |
Rainfall |
Species number of swimmer birds |
Number of swimmer waterbirds |
Species number of shore birds |
Number of shore birds |
Total Species Number |
Total Number of waterbirds |
1995 |
907 |
100cm |
317mm |
20 |
4929 |
9 |
647 |
28 |
5576 |
2005 |
400 |
50cm |
164mm |
15 |
1736 |
8 |
627 |
23 |
2363 |
2015 |
200 |
40cm |
302mm |
11 |
334 |
6 |
326 |
17 |
660 |
Table 7:Pearson correlation coefficient for determining the relationship between area, depth, populations, and bird diversity of Kaniboarazan Wetland in 1995, 2005 and 2015
Factors |
Pearson correlation |
Area and depth |
Area and depth of wetland |
Pearson correlation |
1 |
|
Sig. (2-tailed) |
|
|
Number |
12 |
Total species of waterbirds |
Pearson correlation |
0.507 |
|
Sig. (2-tailed) |
0.093 |
|
Number |
12 |
Total population of waterbirds |
Pearson correlation |
0.44 |
|
Sig. (2-tailed) |
0.15 |
|
Number |
12 |
Species number of swimmer waterbirds |
Pearson correlation |
-0.125 |
|
Sig. (2-tailed) |
0.7 |
|
Number |
12 |
Population of swimmer waterbirds |
Pearson correlation |
-0.166 |
|
Sig. (2-tailed) |
0.6 |
|
Number |
12 |
Number of species of shore birds |
Pearson correlation |
-0.12 |
|
Sig. (2-tailed) |
0.7 |
|
Number |
12 |
Population of shore birds |
Pearson correlation |
-0.37 |
|
Sig. (2-tailed) |
0.24 |
|
Number |
12 |
Before the drying of Lake Urmia, the Kaniborazan wetland
was connected to it. Its water was from direct precipitation,
surface runoff of the adjacent hills, Khor-Khore and Qaradagh
springs, and the Mahabad River. During wet years it’s splashed
into Lake Urmia. During the wet years of Lake Urmia, the water
returned to the Kaniborazan wetland. Increase or decrease of
amount of water of Urmia Lake influences in depth, area, and
amount of water and wetland area. Among the most important
impacts of Urmia Lake’s water advent and retreat towards the
Kaniborazan wetland is the drying of the surrounding areas of
the Gharedagh canal, the northern, northwest, and eastern parts
of the wetland. The lands left for the advancement and retreat of
Lake Urmia waters have been transformed into salt lands, and
Plants that grow in salty lands have quickly been replaced in
these lands. The advent of the salty water into the Kaniborazan
caused the intersection of freshwater mixture with different
gravity and two separate layer of water in the opposite flow.
Because fresh water of wetland is lighter, it flows from the surface
layer to the Urmia Lake, and the Salty water of Lake Urmia, which
are heavier, moves from bottom of the lake to the wetland. The
fresh and salty water contributed greatly to the entire ecosystem
of the wetland, especially the superiority and type of the Fauna
and flora of the wetland. These Since 1995, which was a wet year,
and Lake Urmia, were connected to the Kaniborazan wetland,
when the south of the lake Urmia was completely dry in 2015,
depth and area of the wetland decreased by less than 30%, it was
negative affected on the number, diversity, density, and abandoned
of waterbirds and species diversity reduced from 28 to 17 species
and population of waterbirds decreased from 5576 to 660
individuals figures 3 and 4. In a similar study in 2013 Behrouzi-
Figure 3:Relationship between trend of waterbirds population and area of kaniborazan in three years
Figure 4:Relationship between average depth of wetland and species number of waterbirds in three years
Rad reported the Urmia Lake drying affected on the populations
of breeding waterbirds in Urmia Lake and breeding population of
waterbirds has reduced 98 percent in 2001 [7]. His findings
confirm the results of this study. Therefore, drying of Lake Urmia
and decreasing the Area and depth of the Kaniborazan wetland
have had a negative effect on the diversity and density of
waterbirds table 1. Reducing the depth of the wetland has not
only had a negative impact on diversity and density, but has also
changed the species composition of the waterbirds in the wetland.
The wetland was dominated by swimmer waterbirds in 1995;
Species such as Pochard with population 234 individuals, Coot
with 1211 individuals were dominant. These two species are the
diving waterbirds that perform the water bodies with a depth of
more than 1 meter [26]. But, the population of the two species is
decreased to 120 and 622 in 2005 respectively, and it is decreased
to zero and 72 individuals in 2015 respectively. A 100% reduction
was in pochard population and a 94% reduction in Coot table 4.
The reason for this is to reduce the depth of the water in the
wetland, which allows dive into the water and reach for food at
the bed of wetland. Because the depth of water has been reduced,
this is not possible as a result populations of these species
reduced. But White Stork, the Little Egret and the Grey Heron are
the shallow water index (water index with a depth of less than 40
centimeters), and by walking in the shallow waters or standing
together in shallow places, they feed on the aquatic animals [9],
from 6 to 123 individuals (95% increase), from 12 to 134
individuals (91% increase) and from 21 to 43 individuals (51%
increase), respectively. Reducing the diving species and increasing
the shore birds species indicates a decrease in the volume and
depth of the water, confirming the decline in the size of the
wetland figures 3 and 4. The drying of the Urmia Lake has not
only lost the breeding bird’s colony in the lake [7], but also
negatively affected the southern wetlands of the lake, and the
diversity and composition of the species of shore birds and
swimmer waterbirds in the Kaniborazan wetland has been
reduced and the composition of their species has changed. The
population of the White-winged Black Tern Chelidonias
leucopterus population, which catches the fish or other water
animals from surface of water [9], has decreased from 543 in
1995 to 185 in 2015 (66%), indicating that the Kaniborazan
wetland habitat changed in 2015 for the food of this species and
caused to reduced its population table 4. The population of shore
birds such as lapwing and Black-winged Stilt reduced 99.5% and
65%, respectively table 4. These species feed on benthoses at
around of wetlands [9]. Due to the drying of moisture lands
around the wetland, due to reduction of its depth and area, it is
impossible to feed to benthos eaters such as Waders and shore
birds, as a result, their populations have declined. Of the three
fish-eating species, the White Pelican population, from 6 to zero,
population of Little Grebe from 12 to 5, and the population of
Great Crested Grebe, declined from 170 to zero individuals in
2015 table 4. This indicates the deterioration of the aquatic
environment in the wetland and its impact on the populations of
waterbirds. Changes in population and number of species have a
negative effect on biological indices, species diversity, such as
Margalef, Shannon-Weiner, Fisher-alpha, Menhinick, Brillouin
and Alpha diversity reduction, evenness and dominance of
Simpson and Wittaker and Harison beta have increased tables 1
and 2. Also, the similarity of the population of waterbirds in the
years 1995 and 2015 was reduced, and the Euclidean difference
coefficient was increased table 5. The Euclidean difference
coefficients of the Kaniborazan wetland between 1995, 2005, and
2015 were 126, 356 and 270 respectively, and their similarity
was 66, 30, and 37 percent, respectively table 5. The difference in
Wittaker’s beta diversity were 0.24, 0.38, and 0.43, and the
Harison beta diversity were 0.007, 0.020 and 0.018 respectively
in these three years, indicating a significant difference between
the waterbirds community in 1995 with the 2015 waterbirds
community. Biodiversity indicators of waterbirds have decreased,
such as Margalf species diversity index from 3.36 to 2.47, Fisher-
Alpha diversity from 4.16 to 0.19, but Simpson’s evenness
increased from 0.31 to 0.48 finding that changes in the community
of waterbirds, because with the reduction of diversity, evenness
means the distribution of species within the population has
become more uniform. Reducing diversity and increasing
uniformity is a reason for the decline in the quality of the habitat
of the wetland. The percentage of similarity of waterbirds in three
years was 66, 30 and 37 percent, respectively, and Euclidean
difference of waterbirds in the three years was 126, 256 and 370,
respectively, which indicates the difference in the population of
waterbirds between 1995, 2005 and 1394, tables (1 and 3).
Reducing species diversity, increasing uniformity, reducing the
biodiversity index of waterbirds is in relation to wetland water
status tables (3 and 7), it was wet year in 1995 and connected to
the Lake Urmia, but in 2015 (dry year) it was separated from the
lake and its water depth decreased, resulting in a decrease in its
area by 30%. These findings are confirming the results of the
study of the effects of drying Lake Urmia on the breeding
waterbirds of the lake of Urmia in 1981 and 2011 [7]. In a similar
study, Khalilipour and Behroozi Rad (2007) investigate the
relationship between the species diversity and number of
waterbirds in the southern wetlands of the Caspian Sea, and
concluded that in larger wetlands, species diversity and number
of waterbirds were higher than small one [8]. The current study
confirms the results of that study. Golshahi et al., In (2009), have
achieved the same result, in the study of the population and
species diversity of waterbirds in the Alagol, Almagol and Ajigolag
wetlands at south of Caspian sea coasts, and reported that in
wetlands with greater depth and Area, the number of waterbirds
and species diversity are higher. Nabavi and colleagues (2005), in
a similar study, reported that in deep parts of Shadegan wetland,
diving species of waterbirds were more than shallow parts of
wetland, and waterbirds were more in the shore and shallow
parts of the Shadegan wetland, which is similar to the results of
current research and confirms it. [30], studied changes in the
diversity and abundance of waterbirds in water ecosystems in
Khorasan Razavi province and reported that in larger wetlands,
the number of species and the population of birds is higher. His
findings are similar to the results of the current study, and confirm
it. [14], in a study titled waterbirds as an indicator of the
environmental condition, has reported that population changes
and species diversity are influenced by the environmental quality
of the wetland, its water content and its depth. The results
obtained by Green are similar to this study, and confirm it. The
results of past and current researches indicate that the water
level, depth, and Area of the wetlands in the amount of Alpha,
Beta and Gamma diversity, Margalf, Berger-Parker, Brillouin,
Shannon-Weiner, and Menhinik diversity in water ecosystems
biodiversity indicators are effective, and the alpha diversity,
which expresses the number of species in each ecosystem, is
higher in larger wetlands. Beta diversity, which indicates the
difference between two times in one ecosystem, or in two
ecosystems, shows that the difference in the number of species in
the kaniborazan has increased from 1995 to 2015 table 3. The
final result is that one of the most important values of this wetland
is the protection of waterbirds, which provides an attraction for
birdwatchers figure 2. According to the latest survey, 32 species
of waterbirds belonging to 11 families were identified and
reported in this wetland. With Terrestrial bird’s species, this
number reaches more than 100 species. The diversity of
waterbirds and terrestrial reveals the importance of the
Kaniborazan wetland. The presence of endangered species, such
as Pygmy Cormorant, Farraginous Duck, White-headed Duck,
Marbled Duck, and Protected species in Iran such as White Pelican
and White Stork [10] adds value to the wetland value. For this
reason, the Kaniborazan wetland has been added to the list of
important international wetlands in 2011 and has been registered
at the Ramsar Convention as an important international wetland
[12]. Drying the Lake Urmia and disconnecting water between
the wetland and the lake, dividing the wetland due to the
construction of a drainage channel, which completely dries the
majority of the Kaniborazan wetland during the summer. Reduced
area of the wetland due to drying, failure to comply strictly with
the environmental protection regulations,(the existence of illegal
hunting and fishing), construction of small hunter room in the
wetland, grazing on the inside of the wetland in the spring, easy
access to the wetland, lack of tourists management in the wetland,
water drainage of the Kaniborazan wetland, the entry of pesticides
into the wetland, Harvest of water plants such as Typha and
Phragmites and finally drought are the most important threat
factors in the wetland. In the absence of attention and planning to
protect and manage its ecosystems, the remaining small
population of waterbird will also be destroyed. Most importantly,
the lack of management program, failure to restoration the Lake
Urmia timely will lead to a crisis of salt storm. Because ecosystems
of Lake Urmia, along with its marginal wetlands, play an essential
role in protecting waterbirds, agriculture and ecotourism in the
region. For this reasons, it is suggested to study the changes in the
population of reproductive waterbirds in a long time, management
and planning to attract birdwatchers and organizing current
ecologists and study of terrestrial birds in the Kaniboarazan
wetland and other wetlands in the south of Lake Urmia.
- Behrouzi-Rad B. Identification of migrate rout of Greater Flamingo in Iran. Journal of Environment Spring. 1993;1:16-24.
- Behrouzi-Rad B. White-headed Duck as an endangered species. Journal of Environment Summer. 1994;2:42-56.
- Behrouzi-Rad B. wetlands of Iran. Published by Geographic Organization of the Army of the Islamic Republic of Iran. 2008:39-93.
- Behrouzi-Rad B. Identification of migrate rout of White Pelican in Iran. Journal of Natural Resources of Iran. 2009;42:12-18.
- Behrouzi-Rad B. Changes of migrating rout of Red-breasted Goose in Iran as an indicator of deep wetlands ecosystems. Journal of Environment. 2010;32:14-19.
- Behrouzi-Rad B. Identification and Importance of Bird communities as bio-indicators in Urmia Lake ecosystems. Proceeding of the Urmia Lake Challenges Conference. Urmia University, Urmia. 2012.
- Behrouzi-Rad B. Comparison of changes in the number of species and populations of breeding water birds in the Lake Urmia in 1981 and 2011. Journal of Environment Research. 2013;8:195-204.
- Khalilipour A, Behrouzi-Rad B. Investigating changes in the diversity and density of water birds in the southern wetlands of the Caspian Sea. Journal of Environmental Science. 2007;44:20-26.
- Bhushan B. A Field Guide to the Water birds of Asia. Published by Wild Bird Society of Japan. 1993:223.
- Department of Environment of Iran. Laws and Regulations of Environmental Protection of Iran, Establishment of the Office of Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, February. 2000;1:198-209.
- Department of Environment of West Azarbayjan. National Park of Lake Urmia. 1996:98.
- Department of Environment west Azarbayjan. Birdwatchers reports in Kaniborazan wetland, unpublished reports. 2011.
- Department of meteorological of West Azarbaijan. Rainfall in West Azarbaijan province. 2015.
- Amat JA, Green AJ. Water birds as Bio indicators of environmental conditions. Conservation monitoring in freshwater habitat, a practical guide and case studies, Edited by Hurford C, Schneider M, and Cown L. Springer Dordrecht Heidelberg London New York. 2010: 45-52.
- Baldi A, Kisbendek T. Species-specific distribution of reed-nesting passerine across reed-bed edges: Effects of spatial scale and edge type. Acta Zoological Academica Scientiarum Hungaricae. 1999;45(2):97-114.
- Evans MI. Important bird Areas in the Middle East. Published by UK. 1994:31-156.
- Golshahi A, Homami M, Khalilipour O. Study of species diversity of water birds in Alla Gol, Almagol, Aji Gol and Gomishan wetlands. Journal of Wetland Eco-biology. 2009;1(1):18-32.
- Hammer Ø, Harper DAT, Ryan PD. Paleontological Statistics Software (PAST) Package for Education and Data Analysis. Palaeontologia Electronica. 2001;4(1):9.
- Krebs JCh. Ecological Methodology. Published by Harper & Row publishers, London. 2001:93-370.
- IUCN. Red List of Threatened Animals IUCN Switzerland. 2015.
- Masoumi A, Ghahremaninejad F, Abbaspour ND. Flora of the Kaniborazan Wetland. Proceeding of the 2nd National Conference on Climate Change and its Impact on Agriculture and the Environment. 2013.
- Nabavi SMB, Behrouzi-Rad B, Yusufyan S. Determination of density, distribution, and species diversity of water birds in Shadegan wetland. Journal of Environment. 2005;38:109-116.
- Paul A, Thomas JD, Alex G. Indicators for Monitoring Biological Integrity of Inland, Freshwater Wetlands. Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington DC USA. 2001:219.
- Ramsar Convention Bureau. Ramsar information Sheet. 2015.
- Scott DA. A Directory of Wetlands in the Middle East. Published by IUCN, Switzerland. 1995:43-221.
- Scott DA. A Review of the Status of the Breeding Water birds in Iran in the 1970s. Podoces. 2007;2(1):1-21.
- Scott DA. Rare birds in Iran in the late 1960s and 1970s. Podoces. 2008;3(1/2):1-30.
- Wetlands International. Water bird Population Estimates, 4th Edition. Wetlands International, Wageningen. 2006:320.
- Whittaker RH. Evolution and Measurement of Species Diversity. Taxon. 1972;21(2/3):213-251.
- Yazdandad H. Investigation of variation and frequency of water birds in aquatic ecosystems of Khorasan Razavi province. Journal of animal Environmet. 2011;3(1):45-58.