The sub-basin springs of Poxim river, state of Sergipe: the degradation to restoration

Estudos ambientais em bacias hidrográficas são fundamentais para o entendimento do uso dos recursos naturais e dos problemas relacionados à ocupação do espaço. Em Sergipe, há necessidade de se obter informações para fins de planejamento e gestão futura de suas bacias hidrográficas, uma vez que gradualmente observa-se uma redução do volume produzido nos cursos d'água e da qualidade de suas águas, que são imprescindíveis para o abastecimento humano, a utilização na agricultura e na indústria. Devido ao acelerado processo de supressão da vegetação na sub-bacia hidrográfica do rio Poxim, formada pelos rios Poxim-mirim, Poxim-açu, e Pitanga e seus pequenos tributários, foi realizado um diagnóstico para se verificar o estado de conservação das suas principais nascentes, a situação quanto ao fluxo de água, as formas de uso e ocupação do solo no entorno destas e os tipos fisionômicos de vegetação remanescentes. As informações obtidas serão úteis para a realização de projetos de restauração ambiental, a promoção de melhorias no ambiente e nas comunidades rurais e resgate da diversidade da flora e fauna nestas áreas. Observou-se que as 20 principais nascentes dos rios e tributários que compõem a sub-bacia hidrográfica do rio Poxim, apresentam alterações decorrentes da acelerada antropização (90%), a maioria delas (65%) com elevada degradação (sem raio mínimo de 50m de vegetação) e ocupadas por agricultura (50%) e pastagens (35%). Somente duas nascentes encontram-se preservadas. Quanto à composição florística, as espécies identificadas (43) podem ser utilizadas em projetos futuros para restauração das nascentes e dos cursos d'água nesta sub-bacia hidrográfica. _________________________________________________________________________________________ ABSTRACT: Environmental studies on river basins are fundamental to understanding the natural resources use and the problems related to the space occupation. In Sergipe, it is necessary to obtain information for planning purposes and future management of their watersheds, once the watercourses volume and its quality are reducing gradually, which are essential for human supply and use in agriculture and industry. Due to the accelerated removal of vegetation in the river Poxim sub-basin, formed by the Poxim-Mirim, Poxim-Açu, Pitanga rivers, and its small tributaries, a diagnosis was carried out to verify the conservation status of their main sources, the situation on the water flow, the different uses, and land use around these sources and the remaining vegetation physiognomic types. The information is useful for carrying out environmental restoration projects, promoting improvements in the environment and in the rural communities and for the flora and fauna diversity rescue in these areas. It was observed that the 20 rivers sources top and tributaries that compose the river Poxim sub-basin showed changes from accelerated human anthropization (90%), most (65%) with high degradation (no vegetation in the minimum radius of 50 m), being occupied by agriculture (50%) and pastures (35%). Only two sources were preserved. The floristic composition, the identified species (43) can be used in future projects for sources and watercourses restoration in this sub-basin

Photography-based taxonomy is inadequate, unnecessary, and potentially harmful for biological sciences

The question whether taxonomic descriptions naming new animal species without type specimen(s) deposited in collections should be accepted for publication by scientific journals and allowed by the Code has already been discussed in Zootaxa (Dubois & Nemésio 2007; Donegan 2008, 2009; Nemésio 2009a–b; Dubois 2009; Gentile & Snell 2009; Minelli 2009; Cianferoni & Bartolozzi 2016; Amorim et al. 2016). This question was again raised in a letter supported by 35 signatories published in the journal Nature (Pape et al. 2016) on 15 September 2016. On 25 September 2016, the following rebuttal (strictly limited to 300 words as per the editorial rules of Nature) was submitted to Nature, which on 18 October 2016 refused to publish it. As we think this problem is a very important one for zoological taxonomy, this text is published here exactly as submitted to Nature, followed by the list of the 493 taxonomists and collection-based researchers who signed it in the short time span from 20 September to 6 October 2016