Detection of ecological change in stream macroinvertebrate assemblages using single metric, multimetric or multivariate approaches

Lücke, Joakim Dahl; Johnson, Richard K.

doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2008.08.005

Cited by 42 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, metrics like DCA axis scores that more broadly described assemblages had generally stronger correlations with environmental characteristics than did the more specific biological metrics. This finding agrees with other studies that recommend the use of multimetric approaches for bioassessment (for example, see Karr, 1981;Lücke and Johnson, 2009). …”

Section: Biological Metrics With Environmental Characteristicssupporting

confidence: 83%

Evaluation of aquatic biota in relation to environmental characteristics measured at multiple scales in agricultural streams of the Midwest: 1993-2004

Berkman¹,

Scudder²,

Lutz³

et al. 2010

Scientific Investigations Report

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For more information on the USGS-the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1-888-ASK-USGS.For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprodTo order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report.Suggested citation: Hambrook Berkman, J.A., Scudder, B.C., Lutz, M.A., and Harris, M.A., 2010, Evaluation of aquatic biota in relation to environmental characteristics measured at multiple scales in agricultural streams of the Midwest, 1993-2004: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report, 2010-5051, 24 p. ISBN 978-1-4113-2915 iii ForewordThe U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is committed to providing the Nation with reliable scientific information that helps to enhance and protect the overall quality of life and that facilitates effective management of water, biological, energy, and mineral resources (http://www.usgs. gov/). Information on the Nation's water resources is critical to ensuring long-term availability of water that is safe for drinking and recreation and is suitable for industry, irrigation, and fish and wildlife. Population growth and increasing demands for water make the availability of that water, now measured in terms of quantity and quality, even more essential to the long-term sustainability of our communities and ecosystems.The USGS implemented the National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program in 1991 to support national, regional, State, and local information needs and decisions related to water-quality management and policy (http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa). The NAWQA Program is designed to answer: What is the quality of our Nation's streams and groundwater? How are conditions changing over time? How do natural features and human activities affect the quality of streams and groundwater, and where are those effects most pronounced? By combining information on water chemistry, physical characteristics, stream habitat, and aquatic life, the NAWQA Program aims to provide science-based insights for current and emerging water issues and priorities. During 1991-2001, the NAWQA Program completed interdisciplinary assessments and established a baseline understanding of water-quality conditions in 51 of the Nation's river watersheds and aquifers, referred to as Study Units (http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/studyu.html).National and regional assessments are ongoing in the second decade (2001)(2002)(2003)(2004)(2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010)(2011)(2012) of the NAWQA Program as 42 of the 51 Study Units are selectively reassessed. These assessments extend the findings in the Study Units by determ...

show abstract

Section: Biological Metrics With Environmental Characteristicssupporting

confidence: 83%

Evaluation of aquatic biota in relation to environmental characteristics measured at multiple scales in agricultural streams of the Midwest: 1993-2004

Berkman¹,

Scudder²,

Lutz³

et al. 2010

Scientific Investigations Report

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…ThisSASS5 score was also validated by the pH and DO values that were both out of the accepted range for good quality water and a very high coliform count that indicated a very poor water quality rating, unfit for human use [43]. To a large extent the levels of pollution on this part of the river can also be confirmed by the high concentration of the water hyacinth plants, which are also a signature mark of the presence of high water nutrient content [41]. The mainreason to justify the high levels of water pollution observed on this site is the presence of city's domestic and industrial wastewater effluent treatment plant upstream that discharges its treated effluent into the river.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several studies indicate that using a multimeric approach (i.e. the use of multiple metrics from different ecosystems levels and functions) rather than a single biotic index would provide more robust ecological information needed for the management of water resources [41]. In addition, because of its rapid assessment nature, taxonomic resolution in SASS is at the family level.…”

Section: The South African Scoring System (Sass)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomonitoring of Mucheke and Shagashe Rivers in Masvingo, Zimbabwe Using Macro-Invertebrates as Indicators of Water Quality

Chikodzi¹,

Mabhegedhe²,

Tunha³

2017

GEP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The traditional way of assessing water quality of water bodies is through measurement of biological, physical and chemical parameters. However, such assessments only reflect the concentration of pollutants at the time of sampling not periodic pollution events. The goal of the study was to evaluate the river health using the macro-invertebrates that are found within the Mucheke and Shagashe rivers of Masvingo City as water quality monitors. The South African Scoring System (SASS 5) was used to score using the sensitivity of macro-invertebrates to levels of pollution in the two river systems. The data collection process was carried in April 2017 at four sampling sites using the kick sampling method and results validated by testing the physical, chemical and biological characteristics of the water and comparing them with the macro-invertebrates score. Results showed that the mean sensitivity score of macro-invertebrates showed variations depending on the selected site. Sample sites B2 and A2 downstream of the two river systems show high levels pollution tolerant macro-invertebrates as compared to sites A1 and B1 that are on the upper course and have more of pollution sensitive macro-invertebrates. On validation, to a large extent the levels of pollution indicated by macro-invertebrates were found to be congruent to the levels of pollution indicated by the physical, chemical and biological parameters. The research concludes that the presence of specific types of macro-invertebrates can be used to assess the levels of pollution in Mucheke and Shagashe rivers of Masvingo City.

show abstract

“…Significance levels are * P B 0.05, ** P B 0.01, *** P B 0.001 needed to conduct extensive surveys but also because there is still no agreement on the method to be used (Gascon et al, 2009). Biodiversity-related measures are the most commonly used estimators (Magurran, 1988), but rarity (Schmera, 2003), endangerment status (Brooks et al, 1999), typicalness (Eyre & Rushton, 1989), endemism (Turpie et al, 2000), functional diversity measures (Schmera et al, 2009) or multimetric indices (Lücke & Johnson, 2009) are also frequently used. Each measure represents a unique aspect of conservation value and measures are not necessarily correlated (Williams et al, 1996;Schmera, 2003;Wilsey et al, 2005;Heino et al, 2007;Gascon et al, 2009).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing a typology system of running waters for conservation planning in Hungary

Schmera

Baur

2011

Hydrobiologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Landscape and site classifications are increasingly being used in conservation planning and biodiversity management. We examined the utility of a simple typology system for predicting the conservation value of running-water sites in Hungary using aquatic invertebrates. Aquatic invertebrates (444 species) were collected by kick and sweep sampling technique, in a few cases also with a net, at 317 running-water sites covering the entire area of Hungary. On the basis of three criteria (naturalness, altitude and size of catchment area) we obtained a typology scheme distinguishing five running-water types: artificial lowland stream, natural highland river, natural highland stream, natural lowland river and natural lowland stream. We expressed the conservation value of each site using the numbers of native species, unique native species, redlist species, protected species and alien species.Furthermore, the conservation value of each river type was expressed by a measure of beta diversity. Our results show that any interpretation of the effect of a single criterion might be misleading. Consequently, the use of the whole typology system is recommended. The study revealed that all stream types are valuable to a certain extent because they maintain distinct biological communities. We found that the conservation value of artificial watercourses is comparable to that of natural running-water sites. We identified that natural lowland rivers and artificial lowland streams are the ones mostly exposed to species invasions. These findings are essential in maintaining and protecting conservation values of any freshwater ecosystem, and may contribute to management decisions on running waters in Hungary.

show abstract

Detection of ecological change in stream macroinvertebrate assemblages using single metric, multimetric or multivariate approaches

Cited by 42 publications

References 31 publications

Evaluation of aquatic biota in relation to environmental characteristics measured at multiple scales in agricultural streams of the Midwest: 1993-2004

Evaluation of aquatic biota in relation to environmental characteristics measured at multiple scales in agricultural streams of the Midwest: 1993-2004

Biomonitoring of Mucheke and Shagashe Rivers in Masvingo, Zimbabwe Using Macro-Invertebrates as Indicators of Water Quality

Testing a typology system of running waters for conservation planning in Hungary

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About