• Metadata Catalogue
  •   Search
  •   Map

EDP Foz Tua: Arthropoda – Environmental Impact Assessment [2006-2008]

The dataset contains records of arthropods collected in the lower reaches of the Tua river, and included in the Environmental Impact Assessment of the Foz Tua Hydroelectric Dam, promoted by EDP – Energias de Portugal, S.A. Most data was collected between June 2006 and June 2008, during field visits to 7 sections of the river Tua valley. The main taxa targeted during the field visits were Lepidoptera, Coleoptera, Hemiptera, Orthoptera, and Odonata. Part of the specimens have been kept in the private collections of the collectors indicated in the dataset.

  • Default
  • Project
  • Methods
  • Data Tables

Default

Identification

Alternate Identifier

85a3c886-3312-45c9-b040-4d7634653246

Publication Date
2018-03-22
Title

EDP Foz Tua: Arthropoda – Environmental Impact Assessment [2006-2008]

Abstract

The dataset contains records of arthropods collected in the lower reaches of the Tua river, and included in the Environmental Impact Assessment of the Foz Tua Hydroelectric Dam, promoted by EDP – Energias de Portugal, S.A. Most data was collected between June 2006 and June 2008, during field visits to 7 sections of the river Tua valley. The main taxa targeted during the field visits were Lepidoptera, Coleoptera, Hemiptera, Orthoptera, and Odonata. Part of the specimens have been kept in the private collections of the collectors indicated in the dataset.

purpose

This dataset is part of a broader initiative whereby the company EDP - Energias de Portugal S.A. will made available biodiversity data collected during impact assessment and biological monitoring studies.

Dataset Language

ENGLISH

 
Dataset Creator
  CIBIO-InBIO, Centro de Investigação em Biodiversidade e Recursos Genéticos, Universidade do Porto - Pedro Beja (Researcher)

Campus Agrário de Vairão

,

Vairão

,

4485-661 Vairão

,

PORTUGAL

Dataset Creator
  Instituto Superior de Agronomia - Rui Figueira (Researcher)

Tapada da Ajuda

,

Lisbon

,

1349-017 Lisboa

,

PORTUGAL

Metadata Provider
  CIBIO-InBIO, Centro de Investigação em Biodiversidade e Recursos Genéticos, Universidade do Porto - Martin Corley (Researcher)

Campus Agrário de Vairão

,

Vairão

,

4485-661 Vairão

,

PORTUGAL

Metadata Provider
  Museu de História Natural e da Ciência, Universidade do Porto - José Manuel Grosso-Silva (Researcher)

Praça Gomes Teixeira

,

Porto

,

4099-002 Porto

,

PORTUGAL

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jose_Manuel_Grosso-Silva
Metadata Provider
  CIBIO-InBIO, Centro de Investigação em Biodiversidade e Recursos Genéticos, Universidade do Porto - Sónia Ferreira (Researcher)

Campus Agrário de Vairão

,

Vairão

,

4485-661 Vairão

,

PORTUGAL

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sonia_Ferreira9
Metadata Provider
  CIBIO-InBIO, Centro de Investigação em Biodiversidade e Recursos Genéticos, Universidade do Porto - Pedro Beja (Researcher)

Campus Agrário de Vairão

,

Vairão

,

4485-661

,

PORTUGAL

Metadata Provider
  CIBIO-InBIO, Centro de Investigação em Biodiversidade e Recursos Genéticos, Universidade do Porto - Pedro Sousa (Researcher)

Campus Agrário de Vairão

,

Vairão

,

4485-661

,

PORTUGAL

Dataset Contact
  EDP - Energia de Portugal - João Madeira (Manager)

Av. 24 Julho, 12, Torre Nascente, Piso 4

,

Lisbon

,

1249-300 Lisboa

,

PORTUGAL

Keywords (GBIF Dataset Type Vocabulary: http://rs.gbif.org/vocabulary/gbif/dataset_type.xml)
  • Occurrence

Keywords (GBIF Dataset Subtype Vocabulary: http://rs.gbif.org/vocabulary/gbif/dataset_subtype.xml)
  • Observation

Keywords (NA)
  • Arachnids

  • Beetles

  • Moth

  • Dragonfly

  • Arthropods

  • Insect

  • Malacostraca

Geographic Coverage

Geographic Description

The data was collected at 7 sections of the river Tua valley. (Northeast Portugal, Europe). The areas in the region of Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, within the municipalities of Alijó, Carrazeda de Ansiães, and Vila Flor.

Bounding Box

West Bounding Coordinate

-7.429

East Bounding Coordinate

-7.204

North Bounding Coordinate

41.386

South Bounding Coordinate

41.213

Temporal Coverage

Range of Dates

Begin Date

2006-06-05

End Date

2008-06-03

Taxonomic Coverage

General Taxonomic Coverage

The taxonomic coverage of this dataset spans 4 classes, 13 orders, 115 families, and 724 species. The class Insecta accounts for 99% of both the specimens (N=2103) and the species. About 80% of the specimens and 77% of the species are Lepidoptera. The Coleoptera ranks second, with 8% of specimens and 12% of species. The five most represented families were all Lepidoptera (Geometridae, Noctuidae, Crambidae, Pyralidae, Erebidae, Gelechiidae), and accounted for about half the specimens and 44% of the species. A total of 56 families were represented each by five or less specimens.

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Kingdom

Taxonomic Rank Value

Animalia

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Phylum

Taxonomic Rank Value

Arthropoda

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Class

Taxonomic Rank Value

Insecta

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Class

Taxonomic Rank Value

Malacostraca

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Class

Taxonomic Rank Value

Chilopoda

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Class

Taxonomic Rank Value

Arachnida

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Order

Taxonomic Rank Value

Lepidoptera

Common Name

Butterflies and Moths

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Order

Taxonomic Rank Value

Coleoptera

Common Name

Beetles

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Order

Taxonomic Rank Value

Dermaptera

Common Name

Earwigs

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Order

Taxonomic Rank Value

Hemiptera

Common Name

True Bugs

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Order

Taxonomic Rank Value

Orthoptera

Common Name

Grasshoppers and crickets

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Order

Taxonomic Rank Value

Decapoda

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Order

Taxonomic Rank Value

Diptera

Common Name

True Flies

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Order

Taxonomic Rank Value

Hymenoptera

Common Name

Sawflies, Wasps, Bees, and Ants

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Order

Taxonomic Rank Value

Scutigeromorpha

Common Name

House Centipedes

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Order

Taxonomic Rank Value

Mantodea

Common Name

Mantises

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Order

Taxonomic Rank Value

Odonata

Common Name

Dragonflies and Damselflies

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Order

Taxonomic Rank Value

Solifugae

Common Name

Solifuges

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Order

Taxonomic Rank Value

Araneae

Common Name

Spiders

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Acrididae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Aeshnidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Alucitidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Alydidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Amorphoscelididae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Aphodiidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Araneidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Autostichidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Bedelliidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Berytidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Blastobasidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Brachodidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Brentidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Cambaridae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Cantharidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Carabidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Carcinidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Cerambycidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Cercopidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Cetoniidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Choreutidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Chrysomelidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Cicadellidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Cleridae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Coccinellidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Coenagrionidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Coleophoridae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Coreidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Cosmopterigidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Cossidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Crambidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Daesidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Depressariidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Douglasiidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Drepanidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Dynastidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Elachistidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Empusidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Epermeniidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Erebidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Euteliidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Forficulidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Gelechiidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Geometridae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Glyphipterigidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Gomphidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Gracillariidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Gryllidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Hesperiidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Heterogynidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Hydrometridae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Labiduridae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Laemophloeidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Lampyridae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Lasiocampidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Libellulidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Lucanidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Lycaenidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Lygaeidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Lyonetiidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Mantidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Melolonthidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Membracidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Momphidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Monotomidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Mycetophagidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Mycteridae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Nabidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Nepidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Nepticulidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Noctuidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Nolidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Notodontidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Nymphalidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Oecophoridae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Oedemeridae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Opostegidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Papilionidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Pentatomidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Phaneropteridae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Pieridae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Platycnemididae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Plutellidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Prionoceridae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Psychidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Pterolonchidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Pterophoridae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Pyralidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Pyrrhocoridae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Reduviidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Rhopalidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Rhynchitidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Rutelidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Saturniidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Scoliidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Scutelleridae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Scutigeridae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Scydmaenidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Scythrididae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Silphidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Silvanidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Sphingidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Spongiphoridae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Stenocephalidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Syrphidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Tenebrionidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Tetrigidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Tettigoniidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Thomisidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Tineidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Tischeriidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Tortricidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Vespidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Yponomeutidae

Taxonomic Classification

Taxonomic Rank Name

Family

Taxonomic Rank Value

Zopheridae

License Information

Intellectual Rights

This work is licensed under a

Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 License

.

 
 

Additional Metadata

Metadata

GBIF Metadata Block

Date Stamp

2021-11-29T09:03:28Z

Citation

Beja P, Figueira R, Corley M, Grosso-Silva J M, Ferreira S, Sousa P (2018). EDP Foz Tua: Arthropoda – Environmental Impact Assessment [2006-2008]. Version 1.6. EDP - Energias de Portugal. Occurrence dataset https://doi.org/10.15468/jtdrhm accessed via GBIF.org on 2021-11-29.

Bibliography

Corley, M.F.V., Marabuto, E. Pires, P. (2007). New Lepidoptera for the fauna of Portugal (Insecta: Lepidoptera). SHILAP Revta. lepid. 35 (139):321-334.

Corley, M.F.V., Marabuto, E., Maravalhas, E., Pires, P. Cardoso, J.P. (2008). New and interesting Portuguese Lepidoptera records from 2007. SHILAP Revta lepid., 36 (143): 283-300.

Corley, M.F.V., Marabuto, E., Maravalhas, E., Pires, P. Cardoso, J.P. (2011). New and interesting Portuguese Lepidoptera records from 2009 (Insecta: Lepidoptera. SHILAP Revta lepid., 39 (153): 15-35.

Corley, M. F. V., Cardoso, J. P., Dale, M. J., Marabuto, E., Maravalhas, E., Pires, P. (2012a). New and interesting Portuguese Lepidoptera records from 2010 (Insecta: Lepidoptera). SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología, 40(157), 5-21.

Corley, M.F.V., Merckx, T., Cardoso, J.P., Dale, M.J., Marabuto, E., Maravalhas, E. Pires, P. (2012b). New and interesting Portuguese Lepidoptera records from 2011. (Insecta: Lepidoptera). SHILAP Revta lepid., 40 (160): 489-511.

Corley, M. F. V., Merckx, T., Marabuto, E. M., Arnscheid, W. Maravalhas, E. 2013. New and interesting Portuguese Lepidoptera records from 2012 (Insecta: Lepidoptera). SHILAP Revta. lepid., 41 (164): 449-477.

Corley, M.F.V., Rosete, J., Marabuto, E., Maravalhas, E., Pires, P., 2014. New and interesting Portuguese Lepidoptera records from 2013. (Insecta: Lepidoptera). SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología, 42 (168): 587-613.

Corley, M.F.V., Rosete, J., Romão, F., Dale, M. J., Marabuto, E., Maravalhas, E., Pires, P., 2015.– New and interesting Portuguese Lepidoptera records from 2014. (Insecta: Lepidoptera).– SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología 43 (172): 583-613.

Ferreira, S. Grosso-Silva, J. M., 2008. Confirmation of the occurrence of Gryllomorpha uclensis Pantel, 1890 in Portugal (Orthoptera, Gryllidae). Boln. S.E.A., 42: 384.

Grosso-Silva, J. M., 2007. New and interesting beetle (Coleoptera) records from Portugal (5th note). Boln. S.E.A., 40: 471-472.

Mata, L.; Grosso-Silva, J. M. Goula, M., 2013. Pyrrhocoridae from the Iberian Peninsula (Hemiptera: Heteroptera). Heteropterus Rev. Entomol., 13 (2): 175-189.

Valcárcel, J. P.; Grosso-Silva, J. M. Prieto Piloña, F., 2011. Nuevos registros de Mycterus curculioides (Fabricius, 1781) (Coleoptera, Mycteridae) y actualización de su distribución ibérica. Arquivos Entomolóxicos, 5: 153-156.

Logo URL
http://ipt.gbif.pt/ipt/logo.do?r=edp_tua_arthropoda_eia
 

Project

• Project

Title

Environmental Impact Assessment of the Foz Tua Hydroelectric Dam - Arthropod Data

Personnel

Individual Name

Given Name

Martin

Surname

Corley

User ID

A-7851-2008

Role

AUTHOR

Personnel

Individual Name

Given Name

José Manuel

Surname

Grosso-Silva

Role

AUTHOR

Personnel

Individual Name

Given Name

Sónia

Surname

Ferreira

Role

AUTHOR

Personnel

Individual Name

Given Name

Pedro

Surname

Beja

User ID

0000-0001-8164-0760

Role

ADMINISTRATIVE_POINT_OF_CONTACT

Personnel

Individual Name

Given Name

Rui

Surname

Figueira

User ID

0000-0002-8351-4028

Role

ADMINISTRATIVE_POINT_OF_CONTACT

Personnel

Individual Name

Given Name

Pedro

Surname

Sousa

User ID

0000-0002-5859-9656

Role

ADMINISTRATIVE_POINT_OF_CONTACT

Abstract

The database contains records of arthropods collected in the lower reaches of the Tua river and included in the Environmental Impact Assessment of the Foz Tua Hydroelectric Dam, promoted by EDP – Energias de Portugal, S.A. Most data was collected between June 2006 and June 2008, during field visits to 7 sections of the river Tua valley. A total of 2103 specimens were identified, most of which were Lepidoptera (1691), Coleoptera (173), Hemiptera (78), Orthoptera (60), and Odonata (47). These specimens represented 724 species, most of which were Lepidoptera (556), Coleoptera (83), Hemiptera (32), Orthoptera (22), and Odonata (12). Part of the specimens have been kept in the private collections of the collectors indicated in the database.

Funding

The work was funded by EDP - Energias de Portugal, S.A.

Study Area Description

Descriptor

The study was conducted along the margins of the lower Tua river, prior to the construction and subsequent flooding of the valley by the Foz Tua Hydroelectric Dam.

The Rio Tua is formed by the confluence of the Rio Rabaçal and Rio Tuela at Mirandela. It flows some 45 kilometres in a mainly south-west direction to Foz Tua where it enters the Rio Douro. At Mirandela it lies at 215 metres a.s.l. falling to about 80 metres at Foz Tua. In the southern part of its course it cuts through hills which ascend to over 600 m, whereas in the northern part the surrounding higher ground only reaches 300 m. This gives the northern half of the river an open character with some wide gravelly shallows. Very much in contrast, the southern half lies in a deep ravine cut through granite rocks which is where the dam has been constructed and where most of the recording sites were located.

Between the bridge at Foz Tua and the bridge at Brunheda, there was no crossing point over the river, which could only be reached by car on tracks that were sometimes very steep. Only from Vilarinho das Azenhas to Mirandela was there a road running along the valley. However a railway line runs the whole length of the river from Foz Tua all the way to Mirandela, providing access to otherwise inaccessible areas.

According to Köppen Climate Classification, the study area was included in type Csa, corresponding to a temperate climate with dry or hot summer. Mean monthly temperature ranges between 6.1ºC (January) and 23.6ºC. Mean annual precipitation is 520mm and follows the typical seasonal Mediterranean pattern, with most (68%) precipitation concentrated in the wet semester (October-March) and virtual no precipitation in the summer months. A brief description of the seven sections of the river that were sampled (11 sampling sites) is provided from downstream to upstream. For each site the altitude of the main collecting sites is given. Any sites below 170m are nowadays submerged.

Section 1 - Fiolhal. The recording site was by the railway line below Quinta da Ribeira, Altitude 130m. The ravine below the line was steep and wooded, with a variety of trees including Fraxinus angustifolia and Quercus rotundifolia. The riverbed was boulder strewn and the banks had Alnus glutinosa and Salix salvifolia. Above the line the slopes were gentler with vines and olive trees growing on terraces, and patches of Mediterranean scrub including such shrubs as Pistacia terebinthus and Lonicera implexa. Two other areas have been sampled during the day: one in the surroundings of Quinta da Ribeira and one closer to the river mouth.

Section 2 - Amieiro. The recording site was a track leading down into the ravine past the village. The track ends at altitude 150 m, beside a cable car which could be used to access the Santa Luzia railway station on the opposite bank of the river. Below the cable the narrow deep river runs at the bottom of a near vertical sided gorge. One light was always placed at a bend in the track at about 170 m. The slope on the Santa Luzia side had rather open Quercus rotundifolia woodland. The Abreiro side also had some oaks, but was occupied by a patchwork of tiny orchard and garden terraces wherever there was any space between granite cliffs and boulders. The trackside vegetation was a rich and varied selection of herbs and shrubs, while rock crevices are filled with Sedum species and Dianthus lusitanus. This site was always noticeably warmer than other sites at night.

Section 3 - São Lourenço. The recording site was beside the railway line about 500 m south of the village at altitude 160 m. Here the steep wooded ravine probably has the least disturbed vegetation of any site along the river. The vegetation was similar to that below the railway line at Fiolhal, but continues on slightly less steep slopes above the line.

Section 4 - Brunheda. The recording site was just north of the railway station at 160 m. There was some flat ground on both sides of the river at this point. Marginal trees were Salix, Alnus and Populus nigra. Trapped lights were placed on the river gravel patches, that were submerged at some times of year by then. The other bank of the river visited by day. A wide grassy area here has abundant Gratiola officinalis.

Section 5 - Abreiro. The trapping site was beside a track at about 170 m, a few hundred metres south of Abreiro station (which is some two kilometres east of Abreiro village on the other side of the river and in a different municipality). The river here was wide and shallow with gravelly flats. Some rocky outcrops near the bank of the river had Bufonia macropetala, a rare plant in Portugal. There was plentiful Salix salvifolia and some Populus nigra by the river. One section of the track was bordered by a rich selection of small trees and shrubs including Prunus spinosa, Crataegus monogyna, Acer monspessulanus, Quercus rotundifolia, Cytisus, Rubus, Ruscus aculeatus and Clematis campaniflora. The embankment of the railway track was however heavily infested with the exotic Ailanthus.

Section 6 - Ribeirinha. Trapping was on the edge of the village beside the river at 185 m. The river here was wide and shallow with gravel banks. There were marginal Populus nigra and Fraxinus angustifolia.

Section 7 - Vilarinho das Azenhas. The site was immediately upstream of the road bridge about one kilometre east of the village, at altitude 195 m. The river here was fairly wide, with an artificial pool created by a weir. The river banks had abundant Alnus glutinosa and Salix salvifolia and near the banks were some Populus nigra, Ulmus minor, Crataegus monogyna and a little Celtis australis. Climbing these trees were Humulus lupulinus, Calystegia sepia and Solanum dulcamara. The narrow strip between the river and the railway opened a little after a few hundred metres into a grassy area containing some vines.

Design Description

Description

This dataset resulted from field work carried out between 2006 and 2008, involving surveys of arthropod species. The work was associated with the Environmental Impact Assessment of the Foz Tua Hydroelectric Dam. The objective was to obtain baseline information on the species occurring along the lower Tua River, to provide a baseline against which future impacts of this development could be assessed. Sampling was carried out along the margins of the Tua River, including sectors to be flooded by the dam, and sectors upstream of the dam.

 
 

Methods

• Method

Method Step

Description

To be completed.

Sampling

Study Extent

The data was collected within 7 sections of the river Tua valley (Northeast Portugal. Europe), encompassing 11 sampling sites. (Northeast Portugal. Europe). The areas in the region of Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, within the municipalities of Alijó, Carrazeda de Ansiães, and Vila Flor.

Sampling Description

Sampling methods for Lepidoptera

The majority of the data was obtained from nocturnal sampling using 125 w mercury vapour bulbs suspended from a tripod over a white sheet on the ground or on a stand placed in the middle of the sheet. Three such lights were run from a single generator, using lengths of electric cable to separate the lights as far as possible, allowing sampling from different microhabitats. Egg boxes placed on the sheets provided hiding places for moths, reducing the number of moths that are active around the light at any one moment and making examination of the catch easier. Moths were identified visually, using a lens for the smaller species, but if not recognised or when known to be unidentifiable in the field, samples were collected in glass tubes or boxes and later killed in a freezer. These samples were pinned and taken home for later identification, often requiring dissection of genitalia.



Nocturnal sessions began about 30 minutes after sunset and continued until the rate at which new species were appearing rendered further sampling unprofitable. In cooler more humid localities this was earlier than in dry warm sites, where sampling sometimes continued till the first signs of returning daylight. During these hours, the three sheets were visited and examined nearly continually, with only short breaks, mainly to look at the wine ropes.



Wine ropes were also used at night. These are pieces of clothes line soaked in a solution of white sugar in red wine. Usually five were used, hung on small branches of trees or bushes soon after sunset, and then inspected periodically during the night. They were sited where they would not be directly affected by the mercury vapour lights, either at some distance away from the lights or sometimes between two lights if these were sufficiently far apart. Results from this sampling technique are notoriously unpredictable, but usually some species are attracted that have not been attracted to the lights.



Some diurnal sampling was also carried out, but the time spent on this was much less than on the night work and the methods used less efficacious. A small number of species were captured with a net during the day. Larvae were collected when found, and the food-plants noted. These were reared through to adults for identification purposes, but this was not always successful. A few species were identified from leaf mines or characteristic spinnings made by their larvae. In some cases this can be done even if the larva is no longer present.



In the data, counts are provided for each species. Using the sampling techniques given above, counting every individual of every species at the lights is not practicable with the number of species often far exceeding 100. Instead, during the following morning, estimates from memory were made for each species. Obviously this is not rigorously exact, but it does give an approximation of relative numbers. Using this method, occasional checks can be made, by attempting to count all individuals of one or two species and comparing this with an estimated number. From this it is evident that low numbers are reasonably accurate (thus an estimated 5 might actually be 4 or 6 for example) but more abundant species are consistently underestimated.