Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Analysing chemical-induced changes in macroinvertebrate communities in aquatic mesocosm experiments: a comparison of methods

  • Published:
Ecotoxicology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Mesocosm experiments that study the ecological impact of chemicals are often analysed using the multivariate method ‘Principal Response Curves’ (PRCs). Recently, the extension of generalised linear models (GLMs) to multivariate data was introduced as a tool to analyse community data in ecology. Moreover, data aggregation techniques that can be analysed with univariate statistics have been proposed. The aim of this study was to compare their performance. We compiled macroinvertebrate abundance datasets of mesocosm experiments designed for studying the effect of various organic chemicals, mainly pesticides, and re-analysed them. GLMs for multivariate data and selected aggregated endpoints were compared to PRCs regarding their performance and potential to identify affected taxa. In addition, we analysed the inter-replicate variability encountered in the studies. Mesocosm experiments characterised by a higher taxa richness of the community and/or lower taxonomic resolution showed a greater inter-replicate variability, whereas variability decreased the more zero counts were encountered in the samples. GLMs for multivariate data performed equally well as PRCs regarding the community response. However, compared to first axis PRCs, GLMs provided a better indication of individual taxa responding to treatments, as separate models are fitted to each taxon. Data aggregation methods performed considerably poorer compared to PRCs. Multivariate community data, which are generated during mesocosm experiments, should be analysed using multivariate methods to reveal treatment-related community-level responses. GLMs for multivariate data are an alternative to the widely used PRCs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson MJ (2006) Distance based tests for homogeneity of multivariate dispersions. Biometrics 62:245–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson MJ, Crist TO, Chase JM, Vellend M, Inouye BD, Freestone AL, Sanders NJ, Cornell HV, Comita LS, Davies KF, Harrison SP, Kraft NJB, Stegen JC, Swenson NG (2011) Navigating the multiple meanings of beta diversity: a roadmap for the practicing ecologist. Ecol Lett 14:19–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Auber A, Roucaute M, Togola A, Caquet T (2011) Structural and functional effects of conventional and low pesticide input crop-protection programs on benthic macroinvertebrate communities in outdoor pond mesocosms. Ecotoxicology 20:2042–2055

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2014) lme4: linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package version 1.1-0. https://github.com/lme4/lme4/

  • Bayona Y, Roucaute M, Cailleaud K, Lagadic L, Bassères A, Caquet T (2014) Effect of thiram and a petroleum distillate on freshwater macroinvertebrate communities in outdoor stream and pond mesocosms: I Study design, chemical fate and structural responses. Ecotoxicology (submitted)

  • Beketov MA, Kattwinkel M, Liess M (2013) Statistics matter: data aggregation improves identification of community-level effects compared to a commonly used multivariate method. Ecotoxicology 22:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolker B, Brooks M, Clark C, Geange S, Poulsen J, Stevens M, White J (2009) Generalized linear mixed models: a practical guide for ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol Evol 24:127–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brock TCM, Arts GHP, ten Hulscher TEM, de Jong FMV, Luttik R, Roex EWM, Smit CE, van Vliet PJM (2011) Aquatic effect assessment for plant protection products; Dutch proposal that addresses the requirements of the Plant Protection Product Regulation and Water Framework Directive. Alterra Report 2235, Alterra, Wageningen

  • Brock TCM, Hammers-Wirtz M, Hommen U et al (2014) The minimum detectable difference (MDD) and the interpretation of treatment-related effects of pesticides in experimental ecosystems. Environ Sci Pollut Res 22(2):1160–1174. doi:10.1007/s11356-014-3398-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cañedo-Argüelles M, Bundschuh M, Gutiérrez-Cánovas C, Kefford BJ, Prat N, Trobajo R, Schäfer RB (2014) Effects of repeated salt pulses on ecosystem structure and functions in a stream mesocosm. Sci Total Environ 476–477:634–642

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caquet T, Hanson M, Roucaute M, Graham D, Lagadic L (2007) Influence of isolation on the recovery of pond mesocosms from the application of an insecticide. II Benthic macroinvertebrate responses. Environ Toxicol Chem 26:1280–1290

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cuppen JGM, Van den Brink PJ, Camps E, Uil KF, Brock TCM (2000) Impact of the fungicide carbendazim in freshwater microcosms. I. Water quality, breakdown of particulate organic matter and responses of macroinvertebrates. Aquat Toxicol 48:233–250

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Daam MA, Van den Brink PJ, Nogueira AJA (2008) Impact of single and repeated applications of the insecticide chlorpyrifos on tropical freshwater plankton communities. Ecotoxicology 17:756–771

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • De Jong FMW, Brock TCM, Foekema EM, Leeuwangh P (2008) Guidance for summarizing and evaluating aquatic micro- and mesocosm studies. RIVM Report 601506009/2008, RIVM

  • EFSA PPR (2013) Guidance on tiered risk assessment for plant protection products for aquatic organisms in edge-of-field surface waters. EFSA Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues (PPR). Parma, Italy. EFSA J 11(7):3290

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellison AM, Gotelli NJ, Inouye BD, Strong DR (2014) P values, hypothesis testing, and model selection: it’s déjà vu all over again. Ecology 95:609–610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giddings JM, Brock TCM, Heger W, Heimbach F, Maund SJ, Norman S, Ratte H-T, Schäfers C, Streloke M (eds) (2002) Community-level aquatic system studies—interpretation criteria (CLASSIC). SETAC, Pensacola

    Google Scholar 

  • Ippolito A, Carolli M, Varolo E, Villa S, Vighi M (2012) Evaluating pesticide effects on freshwater invertebrate communities in alpine environment: a model ecosystem experiment. Ecotoxicology 21:2051–2067

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Knauer K, Maise S, Thoma G, Hommen U, Gonzalez-Valero J (2005) Long-term variability of zooplankton populations in aquatic mesocosms. Environ Toxicol Chem 24:1182–1189

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Legendre P, Anderson MJ (1999) Distance-based redundancy analysis: testing multispecies responses in multifactorial ecological experiments. Ecol Monogr 69:1–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Legendre P, Gallagher ED (2001) Ecologically meaningful transformations for ordination of species data. Oecologia 129:271–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Legendre P, Legendre L (2012) Numerical ecology. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Legendre P, Oksanen J, ter Braak CJF (2011) Testing the significance of canonical axes in redundancy analysis. Methods Ecol Evol 2:269–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liess M, Beketov M (2011) Traits and stress: keys to identify community effects of low levels of toxicants in test systems. Ecotoxicology 20:1328–1340

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Liess M, Beketov MA (2012) Rebuttal related to “Traits and Stress: Keys to identify community effects of low levels of toxicants in test systems” by Liess and Beketov (2011). Ecotoxicology 21:300–303

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McArdle BH, Anderson MJ (2001) Fitting multivariate models to community data: a comment on distance-based redundancy analysis. Ecology 82:290–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakagawa S, Schielzeth H (2013) A general and simple method for obtaining R2 from generalized linear mixed-effects models. Methods Ecol Evol 4:133–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newman MC, Clements WH (2008) Ecotoxicology : a comprehensive treatment. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Hara RB, Kotze DJ (2010) Do not log-transform count data. Methods Ecol Evol 1:118–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2006a) Guidance document on simulated freshwater lentic field tests (outdoor microcosms and mesocosms). No. 53 in Series on testing and assessment. OECD, Paris

  • OECD (2006b) current approaches in the statistical analysis of ecotoxicity data: a guidance to application. No. 54 in Series on testing and assessment. OECD, Paris

  • Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, Legendre P, Minchin PR, O’Hara RB, Simpson GL, Solymos P, Stevens MHH, Wagner H (2013) Vegan: Community Ecology Package. R package version 2.1-41. http://vegan.r-forge.r-project.org/

  • Poisot TE, Mounce R, Gravel D (2013) Moving toward a sustainable ecological science: don’t let data go to waste! Ideas Ecol Evol 6:11–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Roessink I, Arts GHP, Belgers JDM, Bransen F, Maund SJ, Brock TCM (2005) Effects of lambda-cyhalothrin in two ditch microcosm systems of different trophic status. Environ Toxicol Chem 24:1684–1696

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez-Bayo F, Goka K (2012) Evaluation of suitable endpoints for assessing the impacts of toxicants at the community level. Ecotoxicology 21:667–680

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sanderson H, Laird B, Brain R, Wilson CJ, Solomon KR (2009) Detectability of fifteen aquatic micro/mesocosms. Ecotoxicology 18:838–845

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schäfer RB, Bundschuh M, Focks A, von der Ohe PC (2013) Letter to the Editor. Environ Toxicol Chem 32:734–735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson GL (2013) Permute: functions for generating restricted permutations of data. R package version 0.8-0. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=permute

  • Stroup WW (2014) Rethinking the analysis of non-normal data in plant and soil science. Agron J 106:1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szöcs E, Kefford BJ, Schäfer RB (2012) Is there an interaction of the effects of salinity and pesticides on the community structure of macroinvertebrates? Sci Total Environ 437:121–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team (2013) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/

  • Van den Brink PJ (2013) Assessing aquatic copulation and community-level risks of pesticides. Environ Toxicol Chem 32:972–973

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Brink PJ, ter Braak CJF (1998) Multivariate analysis of stress in experimental ecosystems by principal response curves and similarity analysis. Aquat Ecol 32:163–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Brink PJ, ter Braak CJF (1999) Principal response curves: analysis of time-dependent multivariate responses of biological community to stress. Environ Toxicol Chem 18:138–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Brink PJ, ter Braak CJF (2012) Response to “Traits and stress: keys to identify community effects of low levels of toxicants in test systems” by Liess and Beketov (2011). Ecotoxicology 21:297–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Brink PJ, van Wijngaarden RPA, Lucassen WGH, Brock TCM, Leeuwangh P (1996) Effects of the insecticide Dursban 4E (active ingredient chlorpyrifos) in outdoor experimental ditches: II. Invertebrate community responses and recovery. Environ Toxicol Chem 15:1143–1153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Brink PJ, Hattink J, Bransen F, van Donk E, Brock TCM (2000) Impact of the fungicide carbendazim in freshwater microcosms. II. Zooplankton, primary producers and final conclusions. Aquat Toxicol 48:251–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Leeuwen CJ, Vermeire TG (2007) Risk assessment of chemicals: an introduction. Springer, Netherlands

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wang M, Riffel M (2011) Making the right conclusions based on wrong results and small sample sizes: interpretation of statistical tests in ecotoxicology. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 74:684–692

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wang Y, Naumann U, Wright ST, Warton DI (2012) mvabund—an R package for model-based analysis of multivariate abundance data. Methods Ecol Evol 3:471–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warton D (2011) Regularized sandwich estimators for analysis of high-dimensional data using generalized estimating equations. Biometrics 67:116–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warton DI, Wright ST, Wang Y (2012) Distance-based multivariate analyses confound location and dispersion effects. Methods Ecol Evol 3:89–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuur A, Ieno E, Elphick C (2010) A protocol for data exploration to avoid common statistical problems. Methods Ecol Evol 1:3–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the contributions from scientists and technicians from the INRA Experimental Unit of Aquatic Ecology and Ecotoxicology and Ecotoxicology and Quality and Aquatic Research Group during mesocosm experiments. These experiments were conducted in programmes funded by the Interface Recherche-Expertise pour l’Evaluation du Risque en Ecotoxicologie coordinated by the Structure Scientifique Mixte INRA–Direction Générale de l’Alimentation (Study no. 8), by the Ministry of Ecology, Sustainable Development and Energy through its “Pesticides” research programme (Study Nos. 3, 4), and by TOTAL S.A. (Study Nos. 10, 11). A. Auber and Y. Bayona PhDs were funded through a grant from The Region Bretagne and INRA and by TOTAL S.A., respectively. The studies conducted at Wageningen UR (Study nos. 1, 7 and 9) were financially supported by the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs, as well as the contribution of Paul Van den Brink and Theo Brock to this paper (Project BO-20-002-001). The data sets of these studies are available upon request.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Environmental Sciences, University Koblenz-Landau, Fortstraße 7, 76829, Landau, Germany

    Eduard Szöcs & Ralf B. Schäfer

  2. Alterra, Wageningen University and Research Centre, P.O. Box 47, 6700 AA, Wageningen, The Netherlands

    Paul J. Van den Brink & Theo C. M. Brock

  3. Department of Aquatic Ecology and Water Quality Management, Wageningen University, Wageningen University and Research Centre, P.O. Box 47, 6700 AA, Wageningen, The Netherlands

    Paul J. Van den Brink

  4. INRA, UMR0985 Ecologie et Santé des Ecosystèmes, Équipe Écotoxicologie et Qualité des Milieux Aquatiques, Agrocampus Ouest, 65 rue de Saint Brieuc, 35042, Rennes Cedex, France

    Laurent Lagadic, Thierry Caquet, Marc Roucaute, Arnaud Auber & Yannick Bayona

  5. Department System Ecotoxicology, UFZ – Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Permoserstrasse 15, 04318, Leipzig, Germany

    Matthias Liess

  6. Mesocosm GmbH, Neu-Ulrichstein 5, 35315, Homberg (Ohm), Germany

    Peter Ebke

  7. International Centre for Pesticides and Health Risk Prevention (ICPS), University Hospital Luigi Sacco, Via GB Grassi, 74, 20157, Milan, Italy

    Alessio Ippolito

  8. Biometris, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands

    Cajo J. F. ter Braak

Authors
  1. Eduard Szöcs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paul J. Van den Brink
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Laurent Lagadic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Thierry Caquet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Marc Roucaute
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Arnaud Auber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Yannick Bayona
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Matthias Liess
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Peter Ebke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Alessio Ippolito
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Cajo J. F. ter Braak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Theo C. M. Brock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Ralf B. Schäfer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eduard Szöcs.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (PDF 667 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Szöcs, E., Van den Brink, P.J., Lagadic, L. et al. Analysing chemical-induced changes in macroinvertebrate communities in aquatic mesocosm experiments: a comparison of methods. Ecotoxicology 24, 760–769 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10646-015-1421-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10646-015-1421-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation