Characterizing and Comparing Bioassessment Methods and Their Results: A Perspective

Diamond, Jerry; Barbour, Michael T.; Stribling, James B.

doi:10.2307/1467818

Cited by 50 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, standardization of sampling and sample processing methods, including sample preservation, remains essential in case of (long-term) routine monitoring programs. Since there are limits to standardization, e.g., among different agencies and water types, we agree with Diamond et al (1996) that it is important to document method performance characteristics through monitoring of data quality to make comparisons between monitoring programs possible.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 61%

“…These sampling and sample processing methods can vary in terms of sampled area, mesh size of sampling gear, sampled habitats, intensity of sorting, and taxonomic resolution of identification, among other parameters. The methodology applied influences the accuracy and variability of bioassessment results (expressed as metric values and/or ecological quality classes) (e.g., Barbour and Gerritsen 1996;Diamond et al 1996;Haase et al 2004). Also, each method can be selective for certain species or groups of species that vary in their exposure and sensitivity to anthropogenic stress (Barton and Metcalfe-Smith 1992).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of bioassessment results and costs between preserved and unpreserved macroinvertebrate samples from streams

Keizer-Vlek

Goedhart

Verdonschot

2010

Environ Monit Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The choice to use or not use a preservative before sorting macroinvertebrate samples (i.e., dead specimens vs. living specimens) is based on studies not solely focused on the effects of preservation. Using identical sample processing protocols, we compared preserved and unpreserved samples for the following parameters: (1) the number of taxa and individuals for each major macroinvertebrate group, (2) ecological quality classes calculated with a multimetric index developed for the assessment of small Dutch lowland streams, and (3) costs of sample processing. We collected macroinvertebrate samples from three lowland streams in the Netherlands. At each site, we collected six replicate samples, of which three samples were preserved and three were not. Significantly different numbers of Ephemeroptera individuals and Hydracarina taxa and individuals were collected from preserved samples compared to unpreserved samples. In assessments based on these individual metrics, standardiza- tion of sample processing will be required. In streams with Ephemeroptera, the preservation of samples is necessary to optimize the number of Ephemeroptera individuals collected. In streams that contain Hydracarina, the preservation of samples will result in an underestimation of the number of Hydracarina taxa and individuals present. In only one instance there was a difference in ecological quality between preserved and unpreserved samples, indicating that assessing small Dutch lowland streams does not require standardization of sample preservation as part of the sample processing protocol. We detected no significant differences in sample processing costs between preserved and unpreserved samples.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 61%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of bioassessment results and costs between preserved and unpreserved macroinvertebrate samples from streams

Keizer-Vlek

Goedhart

Verdonschot

2010

Environ Monit Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Questions have been raised concerning the appropriateness or "accuracy" of rapid bioassessment methods which take few samples from a site and base their measures or scores on subsamples (Diamond et al 1996). We found that the REMS protocol provided reliable estimates of % EPT and MCI compared with the intensive protocol indicating that these indices were robust to sampling intensity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

Influence of substrate type and physico‐chemical conditions on macroinvertebrate faunas and biotic indices of some lowland Waikato, New Zealand, streams

Collier

Ilcock

Meredith

1998

New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lowland streams in agricultural areas are often considered degraded because of high turbidity, high biomass of adventive macrophytes, and a predominance of fine bed substrates. Invertebrate faunas in these streams are being increasingly used in biomonitoring, and an understanding of factors affecting their distribution and abundance is important for interpreting the results of these studies. We measured physicochemical parameters and sampled macroinvertebrate faunas on inorganic substrates, wood, and macrophytes to investigate factors influencing invertebrate distribution and abundance in Waikato, New Zealand, lowland streams, and to evaluate six biotic indices and a rapid bioassessment protocol for lowland stream environments. At most sites, invertebrate faunas were dominated numerically on all substrate types by the hydrobiid snail Potamopyrgus antipodarum (Gray), the eusirid amphipod Paracalliope, and Diptera (mostly the chironomid Neonella forsythii Boothroyd and the blackfly Austrosimulium spp.). Stepwise regression analyses indicated that densities of some common taxa on inorganic substrates (0.1 m -2 ) and macrophytes (g -1 wet weight) were correlated with combinations of reach water depth, percentage of bed covered by macrophytes or sand/silt, and water quality factors including conductivity, water temperature, and measures of dissolved oxygen (DO) concentration and magnitude of diel fluctuation. These factors and also the amount of wood present explained 36-87% of the variation in several of the biotic indices examined on different substrate types. Some taxonomic (no. of taxa) and compositional (% dominant taxon) indices appeared sensitive to measured habitat conditions, and this may affect their utility for detecting water quality impacts in lowland streams. Percent Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Tricoptera (EPT), and the Macroinvertebrate Community Index (MCI) and its quantitative analogue (QMCI) reflected factors thought to be more associated with direct and indirect effects of riparian and catchment land use on water quality (DO, conductivity, temperature, macrophyte cover). Comparison of indices derived from intensive and rapid bioassessment sampling yielded significant regressions with slopes that were not significantly different to 1 for % EPT and MCI. These indices appear to be particularly useful for rapid bioassessment of lowland stream environments.

show abstract

“…The main differences between the two methods are in the subsampling methodology (Marchant box vs teaspoon method), and the sample sorting methodology (microscopic sorting of preserved samples versus visual sorting of live samples). The use of differing methods creates the potential for inconsistent results when data sets are combined and may affect the assessment outcomes (e.g., determination of impairment; Diamond et al, 1996).…”

Section: N O N -C O M M E R C I a L U S E O N L Ymentioning

confidence: 99%

Are bioassessments based on the Reference Condition Approach (RCA) affected by 'rapid' approaches to sample collection and processing?

Valois

Somers²,

Sarrazin-Delay³

et al. 2016

J Limnol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Characterizing and Comparing Bioassessment Methods and Their Results: A Perspective

Cited by 50 publications

References 0 publications

Comparison of bioassessment results and costs between preserved and unpreserved macroinvertebrate samples from streams

Comparison of bioassessment results and costs between preserved and unpreserved macroinvertebrate samples from streams

Influence of substrate type and physico‐chemical conditions on macroinvertebrate faunas and biotic indices of some lowland Waikato, New Zealand, streams

Are bioassessments based on the Reference Condition Approach (RCA) affected by 'rapid' approaches to sample collection and processing?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About