Pollution evaluation in the Shahrood River: Do physico-chemical and macroinvertebrate-based indices indicate same responses to anthropogenic activities?

Abstract

This study evaluates the impact of anthropogenic activities on the Shahrood River using water physico-chemical variables and macroinvertebrates data sets obtained over a period of 12 months between February 2012 and February 2013 at 8 sampling sites. Biotic indices i.e. FBI and BMWP based on macroinvertebrates and physico-chemical indices (MPI, HPI and NSF-WQI) were employed to evaluate the water quality status in connection with natural- and human-induced pressures. Based on physico-chemical indices, water quality was categorized as low polluted level and it is suitable for drinking purposes. The water quality based on biotic indices was related to the anthropic activities; a clear deterioration of the water quality was observed from upstream to downstream sites. The water quality along the river changed from very good (class I; reference sites) to good (class II; midstream sites) and turned into moderate (class III) and poor (class IV) quality (downstream sites). These findings indicate that biotic indices are more powerful indicators in assessing water quality than physico-chemical indices. Allocapnia, Glossosoma and Hesperoperla were exclusively related to least disturbed sites, and Naididae, Orthocladiinae and Ecdyonurus were found in sites showing notable degradation. Our results recommended that the use of macroinvertebrates could be employed as a cost-effective tool for biomonitoring and controlling of polluted riverine ecosystems in the Middle East. Finally, the results from this study may be useful not only for developing countries, but also for any organization struggling to use macroinvertebrate based indices with restricted financial resources and knowledge.

Influence of Water Quality on the Variation Patterns of the Communities of Benthic Macroinvertebrates in the Lakes of the Central Highlands of Peru

“…However, these families are considered resistant and resilient taxa due to the anthropogenic pressure that impoverish biological communities and consequently alter aquatic ecosystems [35] [36]. These results could be related to the hydrological stability and physicochemical quality of water [37]. In addition, they coincide with the results of Verdonschot et al (2012) [38] and [39], who indicate that in areas with a temperate climate, seasonality plays a very important role in the structure of macroinvertebrate communities.…”

Hydro-Oceanographic and Water Quality Assesments As a Basis for the Development of Offshore Aquaculture in the Weh Island, Aceh Province, Indonesia

“…Only one parameter that is under the standard that is dissolved oxygen (DO). DO becomes a limiting factor in the waters which is a chemical indicator of pollution (Sharifinia et al, 2016). The lower value of DO will show the condition toward anoxia which is related to the declination of oxygen penetration to the water.…”

Threshold Responses of Macroinvertebrate Communities to Stream Velocity in Relation to Hydropower Dam: A Case Study from The Guayas River Basin (Ecuador)

“…Previous research has shown that using biotic indices based on family level provides sufficient information to assess the biological water quality [29][30][31][32]. It has been shown that macroinvertebrate-based indices better reflect water quality conditions compared to physical-chemical based indices [33]. Therefore, the biotic macroinvertebrate index BMWP-Colombia (Biological Monitoring Working Party-Colombia) was calculated according to the modified method proposed by Zuniga and Cardona (2009).…”

“…Each macroinvertebrate taxon received a score that reflects its susceptibility to pollution, where pollution-intolerant taxa receive high scores, whereas pollution-tolerant taxa were given low scores [34]. The total score for each site indicated the water quality, with categories ranging from very bad (0-15), bad (16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34)(35), poor , moderate (61-100) to good (>100).…”