Register      Login
Marine and Freshwater Research Marine and Freshwater Research Society
Advances in the aquatic sciences
Shopping Cart: ( empty )
You are here: Home > Journals > MF > MF05041
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Contents Vol 57(1)

Biological indicators of stream health using macroinvertebrate assemblage composition: a comparison of sensitivity to an urban gradient

Christopher J. Walsh
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

Cooperative Research Centre for Freshwater Ecology, Water Studies Centre and School of Biological Sciences, Monash University, VIC 3800, Australia. Email: chris.walsh@sci.monash.edu.au

Marine and Freshwater Research 57(1) 37-47 https://doi.org/10.1071/MF05041
Submitted: 1 March 2005  Accepted: 6 October 2005   Published: 17 January 2006

Abstract

Biological indicators are increasingly being used as integrative measures of ecosystem health in streams, particularly indicators using macroinvertebrate assemblage composition. Several indicators of this type have been advocated, including biotic indices based on taxa sensitivities, richness indices and ratios of observed to expected taxa from models predicting assemblage composition in streams with little human impact (O/E scores). The present study aimed to compare the sensitivity of indicators of each of these types (all used for legislated objectives for stream protection in Victoria, Australia) to a gradient of urban disturbance in 16 streams in a small area in eastern Melbourne. The biotic index SIGNAL and number of Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera or Trichoptera families were the most sensitive indicators, whereas total number of families and O/E scores from Australian river assessment system (AUSRIVAS) models were least sensitive. Differences in sensitivity were not the result of sampling or taxonomic inadequacies. AUSRIVAS and similar models might be improved by using only predictor variables that are not affected by human impacts and by sounder approaches to model selection. Insensitivities of indicators and misclassification of sites by the Victorian objectives show that assessment of indicators against disturbance gradients is critical for setting management objectives based on biological indicators.

Extra keywords: bioassessment, RIVPACS, urbanisation.


Acknowledgments

The present study was part of CRC FE project D210. Macroinvertebrate data were collected as part of Melbourne Water Corporation’s biological monitoring programme, thanks in large part to the support of Rhys Coleman and Graham Rooney. Macroinvertebrates were sampled and identified to family by the Freshwater Ecology section of the Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research: thanks to Diane Crowther, Phil Papas and George Canale. The paper was greatly improved by the suggestions of Leon Metzeling and two anonymous reviewers.


References

ANZECC and ARMCANZ (2000). ‘National Water Quality Management Strategy. Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality. Vol. 1 The Guidelines.’ (Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council, and Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand: Canberra.)

Belbin L. (1993). ‘PATN Pattern Analysis Package.’ (CSIRO Division of Wildlife and Ecology: Canberra.)

Bunn, S. E. , and Davies, P. E. (2000). Biological processes in running waters and their implications for the assessment of ecological integrity. Hydrobiologia 422/423, 61–70.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Burnham K. P., and Anderson D. R. (2002). ‘Model Selection and Multimodel Inference: A Practical Information-Theoretic Approach.’ (Springer: New York.)

Center for Watershed Protection (2003). ‘Impacts of Impervious Cover on Aquatic Ecosystems.’ (Center for Watershed Protection: Ellicott City, Maryland, USA.)

Chessman, B. C. (1995). Rapid assessment of rivers using macroinvertebrates: a procedure based on habitat-specific sampling, family level identification and a biotic index. Australian Journal of Ecology 20, 122–129.
Clarke K. R., and Warwick R. M. (1994). ‘Change in Marine Communities: An Approach to Statistical Analysis and Interpretation.’ (Natural Environment Research Council, Plymouth Marine Laboratory: Plymouth.)

Clarke, R. T. , Furse, M. T. , Wright, J. F. , and Moss, D. (1996). Derivation of a biological quality index for river sites: comparison of the observed with the expected fauna. Journal of Applied Statistics 23, 311–332.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Coysh J., Nichols S., Ransom G., Simpson J., Norris R., Barmuta L., and Chessman B. (2000). ‘AUSRIVAS Macroinvertebrate Bioassessment Predictive Modelling Manual.’ (Cooperative Research Centre for Freshwater Ecology: Canberra.)

Davies P. M. (2000). Development of a national river bioassessment system (AUSRIVAS) in Australia. In ‘Assessing the Biological Quality of Fresh Waters: RIVPACS and Other Techniques’. (Eds J. F. Wright, D. W. Sutcliffe and M. T. Furse.) pp. 113–124. (Freshwater Biological Association: Ambleside, Cumbria, UK.)

De’ath, G. (1999). Principal curves: a new technique for indirect and direct gradient analysis. Ecology 80, 2237–2253.
De’ath G., and Walsh C. J. (2001). ‘The pcurve Package. Principal curve analysis. Documentation for R (R project for statistical computing).’ Available online at: http://cran.r-project.org/ [verified 30 October 2005]

EPA Victoria (2003a). Biological objectives for rivers and streams – ecosystem protection. Environment Protection Authority Victoria, Information Bulletin, Publication No. 793.1, Melbourne.

EPA Victoria (2003b). Rapid bioassessment methodology for rivers and streams. Environment Protection Authority Victoria, Guideline for environmental management, Publication No. 604.1, Melbourne.

EPA Victoria (2003c). Risk assessment approach – ecosystem protection. Environment Protection Authority Victoria, Information Bulletin, Publication No. 790.1, Melbourne.

Flack, V. F. , and Chang, P. C. (1987). Frequency of selecting noise variables in subset regression analysis: a simulation study. The American Statistician 41, 84–86.
Government of Victoria (2003). ‘Variation to State Environment Protection Policy (Waters of Victoria).’ (The Craftsman Press, Victoria Government Gazette No. S 107: Melbourne.)

Graham, M. H. (2003). Confronting multicollinearity in ecological multiple regression. Ecology 84, 2809–2815.
Hardwick R., and Lewin K. (1999). Autumn 1996–spring 1997 macroinvertebrate and sediment toxicants monitoring program. Australian Water Technologies, AWT report No. 274/99, Melbourne.

Hart, B. T. , Maher, B. , and Lawrence, I. (1999). New generation water quality guidelines for ecosystem protection. Freshwater Biology 41, 347–359.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Hawkins C. P., and Norris R. H. (2000). Effects of taxonomic resolution and use of subsets of the fauna on the performance of RIVPACS-type models. In ‘Assessing the Biological Quality of Fresh Waters: RIVPACS and Other Techniques’. (Eds J. F. Wright, D. W. Sutcliffe and M. T. Furse.) pp. 217–240. (Freshwater Biological Association: Ambleside, Cumbria, UK.)

Hawkins, C. P. , Norris, R. H. , Hogue, J. N. , and Feminella, J. W. (2000). Development and evaluation of predictive models for measuring the biological integrity of streams. Ecological Applications 10, 1456–1477.
Hilsenhoff W. L. (1982). Using a biotic index to evaluate water quality in streams. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Technical Bulletin 132, Madison, WI, USA.

Hughes R. M. (1995). Defining acceptable biological status by comparing with reference conditions. In ‘Biological Assessment and Criteria: Tools for Water Resource Planning and Decision Making’. (Eds W. S. Davis and T. P. Simon.) pp. 31–47. (Lewis Publishers: Boca Raton, FL.)

Humphrey C. L., Storey A. W., and Thurtell L. (2000). AUSRIVAS: operator sample processing errors and temporal variability – implications for model sensitivity. In ‘Assessing the Biological Quality of Fresh Waters: RIVPACS and Other Techniques’. (Eds J. F. Wright, D. W. Sutcliffe and M. T. Furse.) pp. 143–163. (Freshwater Biological Association: Ambleside, UK.)

James, F. C. , and McCulloch, C. E. (1990). Multivariate analysis in ecology and systematics: panacea or Pandora’s box? Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 21, 129–166.
Karr J. R., and Chu E. W. (1999). ‘Restoring Life in Running Waters: Better Biological Monitoring.’ (Island Press: Washington, DC.)

Karr, J. R. (1991). Biological integrity: a long-neglected aspect of water resource management. Ecological Applications 1, 66–84.
Papas P. J., and Crowther D. (2002). ‘Melbourne Water monitoring program – 2001/2002.’ (Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, Department of Natural Resources and Environment Victoria: Melbourne.)

Papas P. J., Nicol M., and Crowther D. (2000). ‘Melbourne Water Biological Monitoring Program – 1999/2000.’ (Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Victoria: Melbourne.)

Poff, N. L. (1997). Landscape filters and species traits: towards mechanistic understanding and prediction in stream ecology. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 16, 391–409.
Quinn G. P., and Keough M. J. (2002). ‘Experimental Design and Data Analysis for Biologists.’ (University Press: Cambridge, UK.)

Resh V. H., and Jackson J. K. (1993). Rapid assessment approaches to biomonitoring using benthic macroinvertebrates. In ‘Freshwater Biomonitoring and Benthic Macroinvertebrates’. (Eds D. M. Rosenberg and V. H. Resh.) pp. 195–233. (Chapman and Hall: New York.)

Simpson J. C., and Norris R. H. (2000). Biological assessment of river quality: development of AUSRIVAS models and outputs. In ‘Assessing the Biological Quality of Fresh Waters: RIVPACS and Other Techniques’. (Eds J. F. Wright, D. W. Sutcliffe and M. T. Furse.) pp. 125–142. (Freshwater Biological Association: Ambleside, Cumbria, UK.)

Skjelkvåle, B. L. , Stoddard, J. L. , Jeffries, D. S. , Tørseth, K. , and Høgåsen, T. , et al. (2005). Regional scale evidence for improvements in surface water chemistry 1990–2001. Environmental Pollution (Barking, Essex: 1987) 137, 165–176.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | PubMed | Wright J. F. (2000). An introduction to RIVPACS. In ‘Assessing the Biological Quality of Fresh Waters: RIVPACS and Other Techniques’. (Eds J. F. Wright, D. W. Sutcliffe and M. T. Furse.) pp. 1–24. (Freshwater Biological Association: Ambleside, Cumbria, UK.)

Wright, J. F. , Moss, D. , Armitage, P. D. , and Furse, M. T. (1984). A preliminary classification of running-water sites in Great Britain based on macro-invertebrate species and the prediction of community type using environmental data. Freshwater Biology 14, 221–256.


Wright, J. F. , Furse, M. T. , and Armitage, P. D. (1993). RIVPACS – a technique for evaluating the biological quality of rivers in the U.K. European Water Pollution Control 3, 15–25.