Impact Source Determination With Biomonitoring Data in New York State: Concordance With Environmental Data

Riva-Murray, Karen; Bode, Robert W.; Phillips, Patrick J.; Wall, Gretchen

doi:10.1656/1092-6194(2002)009[0127:isdwbd]2.0.co;2

Cited by 40 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A variety of benthic macroinvertebrate (BMI) community metrics were calculated from the benthic data: Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) richness, family biotic index (FBI), aquatic invertebrate taxa richness (ITR), and biotic assessment profile (BAP). We selected these metrics because they represent positive and negative community attributes and have been widely used in the literature (Bode et al, 1991(Bode et al, , 1996Novak & Bode, 1992;Karr & Chu, 1999;Morely & Karr, 2002;Riva-Murray et al, 2002). High FBI scores indicate poorer quality whereas the other scores indicate better conditions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…ITR is a measure of total number of taxa; higher taxa richness is associated with clean water (Bode et al, 1996). BAP combines these metrics and another (percent model affinity, the degree to which the community represents the reference ''model'' community) to integrate community attributes (Bode et al, 1996;Riva-Murray et al, 2002). We compared the metric values across time (1988 vs. 2001) for comparable sites in the Fishkill Creek; no comparable data were available for the time interval in Wappinger Creek.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since the early 20th century, a substantial, and growing, amount of research has been conducted to assess the integrity of stream ecosystems and ecological processes based on biological communities (e.g., Patrick, 1949;Karr, 1981Karr, , 1991Jones & Clark, 1987;Limburg & Schmidt, 1990;Fore & Karr, 1996;Hall et al, 1996;Wang et al, 1997;Fitzgerald et al, 1998;Bunn & Davies, 2000;Riva-Murray et al, 2002). In addition, much research effort has gone into creating indices that facilitate the collection, analysis, and interpretation of biological variables in relation to disturbance or changes in ecological processes within specific geographic regions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Long-term changes in ecosystem health of two Hudson Valley watersheds, New York, USA, 1936–2001

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examined long-term ecological change in two Hudson River tributaries, the Wappinger and Fishkill Creek watersheds in Dutchess County, New York State. Fish data spanning 65 years (1936, 1988, 1992, and 2001) and shorter term macroinvertebrate data (1988, 2001) were used to assess the influence of land use practices. Between 1988 and 2001, macroinvertebrate index Biotic Assessment Profile (BAP) improved by 113-165% in the Fishkill Creek watershed, and fish Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) improved by 117-140%. Fish IBI and fish species richness were significantly different (p < 0.01) between the watersheds, with Wappinger Creek in better condition. Long-term fish IBI scores showed degradation in both watersheds since the 1930s. Changes in species composition suggest community homogenization on par with overall changes in the fish fauna of New York. Most notable were increases in tolerant species and declines in intolerant or moderately tolerant species. Whereas Fishkill Creek IBIs showed decline in 1988 relative to 1936, followed by improvement, Wappinger Creek declined monotonically in environmental quality. Development has intensified in both watersheds, but Fishkill Creek is improving while Wappinger Creek watershed is undergoing less mitigated degradation. We find that older, semi-quantitative data can be used to construct environmental quality indicators, and can be of great use for measuring long-term change.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Long-term changes in ecosystem health of two Hudson Valley watersheds, New York, USA, 1936–2001

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Species may be better indicators of potential stressors and underlying causal mechanisms than families, if they show specific responses to their environment (Resh and Unzicker 1975;Riva-Murray et al 2002;Pettigrove and Hoffmann 2005;Carew et al 2007b). Species-level identification can yield substantially more information when sites are dominated by speciose families, like the Chironomidae (King and Richardson 2002) or in urban areas where there are only few speciose families (Beavan et al 2001).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Phylogenetic signals and ecotoxicological responses: potential implications for aquatic biomonitoring

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Macroinvertebrates can be successfully used as biomonitors of pollutants and environmental health because some groups are sensitive whereas, others are relatively tolerant to pollutants. An issue of ongoing debate is what constitutes an appropriate group for biomonitoring; should the group represent species, genera or higher taxonomic levels? A phylogenetic framework can provide new insights into this issue. By developing phylogenies for chironomids and mayflies, this investigation shows that there is strong phylogenetic signal for pollution responses, and that phylogenetic nodes are common to tolerant and sensitive groups of species. A phylogenetic analysis of biotic indices developed for mayflies based on their response to organic pollution shows that mayfly families varied in pollution tolerance. In contrast, based on sediment zinc concentrations as an indicator of pollution tolerance, Australian chironomids tend to vary in tolerance at lower taxonomic levels. Published data on North American chironomids shows much of the signal for pollution responses is contained within genera rather than sub-families. Tools are now available to distinguish whether this signal reflects historical evolutionary constraints or environmental effects leading to common evolved responses. This suggests that ideally higher taxonomic levels should be used for biomonitoring when there are strong phylogenetic constraints at higher levels. Evolutionary considerations can therefore help to guide the development of macroinvertebrate biomonitors and provide insights into processes that produce sensitive and tolerant taxa.

show abstract

“…Diagnostic capacity used here means the ability to determine categorical stressors based on the "signatures" of response found in the biological data (Simon 2003). While some working examples of applying such tools exist (Eagleson et al 1990;Yoder and Rankin 1998;Riva-Murray et al 2002;Yoder and DeShon 2003) and are the basis of this element there is scant recognition or use of these principles in most state and tribal programs. The differential responses to categories of stressors (i.e., toxicity, habitat, nutrient enrichment, low D.O., etc.)…”

Section: Element 11: Biological Endpoints and Thresholdsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Critical technical elements of state bioassessment programs: a process to evaluate program rigor and comparability

Yoder¹,

Barbour

2008

Environ Monit Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We developed a systematic process to evaluate state/tribal bioassessment programs to provide information about the rigor of the technical approach. This is accomplished via on-site interviews to produce an evaluation that assigns one of four levels of rigor as an outcome. Level 4 is the most rigorous and reflects a technical capacity to accurately determine incremental condition and support management programs. The remaining three levels are less able to assess incremental condition and are appropriate for only some management support needs. Accurately determining impairment and diagnosing pollution-specific stressors are fundamental tasks that states/tribes must accomplish to provide management support. This goal is fulfilled to varying degrees by most states/tribes. The evaluation employs a checklist and a sliding scale of rigor for 13 technical elements. Feedback is provided to each state/tribe via a technical memorandum that describes the technical components of the monitoring program, highlights strengths, and recommends improvements for specific technical issues. This can be used to refine the bioassessment and monitoring programs to better support management programs. The results of 14 state/tribal evaluations are included here. The majority (nine states, one tribe) revealed that most operate at level 2 with developmental activities that will elevate the level of program rigor already underway. Two states operate level 4 programs and each have numeric biocriteria and refined designated uses in their water quality standards. This is the ultimate goal of the process of engaging states in the development of bioassessment programs in the U.S.

show abstract

Impact Source Determination With Biomonitoring Data in New York State: Concordance With Environmental Data

Cited by 40 publications

References 25 publications

Long-term changes in ecosystem health of two Hudson Valley watersheds, New York, USA, 1936–2001

Long-term changes in ecosystem health of two Hudson Valley watersheds, New York, USA, 1936–2001

Phylogenetic signals and ecotoxicological responses: potential implications for aquatic biomonitoring

Critical technical elements of state bioassessment programs: a process to evaluate program rigor and comparability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About