Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Optimal benthic macrofaunal sampling protocol for detecting differences among four habitats in Willapa Bay, Washington, USA

  • Published:
Estuaries Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As part of an effort to estimate estuarine habitat values with respect to ecological indicators of benthic macrofaunal community condition, an optimal (effective and least costly) sampling protocol (sample unit size [area x depth], sieve mesh size, and sample number [n]) was determined. The goal was to use four ecological indicators (number of species, abundance, biomass, and fish and crab prey abundance) to detect differences among four intertidal habitats in Willapa Bay, Washington, United States. The four habitats were eelgrass (Zostera marina), Atlantic cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora), mud shrimp (Upogebia pugettensis), and ghost shrimp (Neotrypaea californiensis). Four sample unit areas (0.005, 0.010, 0.015, and 0.020 m2), two sample unit depths (0–5 and 0–10 cm), and two sieve mesh sizes (1.0 and 0.5 mm) were evaluated. The optimal sampling protocol was defined as the least costly protocol capable of reliably (statistical power, 1−β≥0.80) detecting significant (α=0.05) differences among ≥4 of the 6 pairwise habitat contrasts by ANOVA on all four ecological indicators. The relative cost of each sampling protocol was estimated as a direct function of the sample unit size and number and the cost-in-processing-time ratios of 1 (5 cm deep):1.7 (10 cm deep) and 1 (≥1.0 mm macrofauna size fraction); 2.5 (≥0.5 mm macrofauna size fraction), which were taken from previous studies. The optimal sampling protocol was 15–20, 0.01-m2×5-cm deep, 0.5-mm mesh samples per habitat.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature Cited

  • Albright, R. and P. K. Bouthillette. 1982. Benthic invertebrate studies in Grays Harbor, Washington, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Contract No. DACW67-80-C-0091. Seattle, Washingon.

  • Allee, R. J., M. Dethier, D. Brown, L. Deegan, R. G. Ford, T. F. Hourigan, J. Maragos, C. Schoch, K. Sealey, R. Twilley, M. P. Weinstein, and M. Yoklavich. 2000. Marine and estuarine ecosystem and habitat classification. NOAA-Fisheries, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-43. Silver Spring, Maryland.

  • Andrew, N. L. andB. D. Mapstone. 1987. Sampling and the description of spatial pattern in marine ecology.Oceanography and Marine Biology. An Annual Review 25:39–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bachelet, G. 1990. The choice of a sieving mesh size in the quantitative assessment of marine macrobenthos: A necessary compromise between aims and constraints.Marine Environmental Research 30:21–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bayer, R. D. 1981. Shallow-water intertidal ichthyofauna of the Yaquina estuary, Oregon.Northwest Science 55:182–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blundon, J. A. andV. S. Kennedy. 1982. Refuges for infaunal bivalves from blue crab,Callinectes sapidus (Rathbun), predation in Chesapeake Bay.Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 65:67–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boesch, D. F. 1977. Application of numerical classification in ecological investigations of water pollution. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Ecological Research Series, EPA-600/3-77-033. Washington, D.C.

  • Boström, C. B. andE. Bonsdorff. 1997. Community structure and spatial variation of benthic invertebrates associated withZostera marina (L.) beds in the northern Baltic Sea.Journal of Sea Research 37:153–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bottom, D. L. andK. K. Jones. 1990. Species composition, distribution, and invertebrate prey of fish assemblages in the Columbia River estuary.Progress in Oceanography 25:243–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowden, D. A., A. A. Rowden, andM. J. Attrill. 2001. Effect of patch size and in-patch location on the infaunal macroinvertebrate assemblages ofZostera marina seagrass beds.Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 259:133–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, J. B. 1984. Sediment analysis, p. 41–65.In N. A. Holme and A. D. McIntyre (eds.), Methods for the Study of Marine Benthos, IBP Handbook No. 16, 2nd edition. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, U.K.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castillo, G. C., T. W. Miller, J. W. Chapman, and H. W. Li. 1996. Non-indigenous species cause major shifts in the foodbase of estuarine-dependent fishes, p. 101–109.In D. Mackinlay and K. Shearer (eds.), Gutshop '96. Feeding Ecology and Nutrition in Fish. Symposium Proceedings. International Congress on the Biology of Fish. San Francisco, California.

  • Cochran, W. G. 1977. Sampling Techniques, 3rd edition. John Wiley and Sons, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Science, revised edition. Academic Press, Orlando, Florida.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeBen, W. A., W. D. Clothier, G. R. Ditsworth, andD. J. Baumgartner. 1990. Spatio-temporal fluctuations in the distribution and abundance of demersal fish and epibenthic crustaceans in Yaquina Bay, Oregon.Estuaries 13:469–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diaz-Ramos, S., D. L. Stevens, Jr., and A. R. Olsen. 1996. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EMAP Statistical Methods Manual EPA/620/R-96/002. Corvallis, Oregon.

  • Downing, J. A. 1979. Aggregation, transformation, and the design of benthos sampling programs.Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 36:1454–1463.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dumbauld, B. R., K. M. Brooks, andM. H. Posey. 2001. Response of an estuarine benthic community to application of the pesticide carbaryl and cultivation of Pacific oysters (Crassostrea gigas) in Willapa Bay, Washington.Marine Pollution Bulletin 42:826–844.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Eleftheriou, A. andN. A. Holme. 1984. Macrofaunal techniques, p. 140–216.In N. A. Holme and A. D. McIntyre (eds.), Methods for the Study of Marine Benthos, IBP Handbook No. 16, 2nd edition. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, U.K.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliott, J. M. 1983. Some Methods for the Statistical Analyses of Samples of Benthic Invertebrates, 2nd edition. 3rd impression. Freshwater Biological Association Scientific Publication No. 25, The Ferry House, U.K.

  • Emmett, R. L., S. L. Stone, S. A. Hinton, andM. E. Monaco. 1991. Distribution and abundance of fishes and invertebrates in west coast estuaries, Volume II. Species Life history summaries. Strategic Environmental Assessments Division. ELMR Report No. 8. National Oceanic and Atmopsheric Administration, National Ocean Service. Rockville, Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferraro, S. P., F. A. Cole, W. A. DeBen, andR. C. Swartz. 1989. Power-cost efficiency of eight macrobenthic sampling schemes in Puget Sound, Washington, USA.Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 46:2157–2165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferraro, S. P., R. C. Swartz, F. A. Cole, andW. A. DeBen. 1994. Optimum macrobenthic sampling protocol for detecting pollution impacts in the Southern California Bight.Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 29:127–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furota, T. and R. L. Emmett. 1993. Seasonal changes in the intertidal and subtidal macrobenthic invertebrate community structure in Baker Bay, lower Columbia River estuary. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-5. Springfield, Virginia.

  • Gotshall, D. W. 1977. Stomach contents of Northern California Dungeness crabs,Cancer magister.California Fish and Game 63:43–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, J. S. 1981. The Ecology of Marine Sediments. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, R. H. 1979. Sampling Design and Statistical Methods for Environmental Biologists. John Wiley and Sons, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunderson, D. R., D. A. Armstrong, Y.-B. Shi, andR. A. McConnaughey. 1990. Patterns of estuarine use by juvenile English sole (Parophrys vetulus) and Dungeness crab (Cancer magister).Estuaries 13:59–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, S. J. 1994. Physical disturbance and marine benthic communities: Life in unconsolidated sediments.Oceanography and Marine Biology: An Annual Review 32:179–239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, J. P. andR. J. Steidl. 1997. Statistical power analysis and amphibian population trends.Conservation Biology 11:273–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedgpeth, J. W. and S. Obrebski. 1981. Willapa Bay: A historical perspective and a rationale for research. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-81/03. Washington, D.C.

  • Heltshe, J. F. andT. A. Ritchey. 1984. Spatial pattern detection using quadrat samples.Biometrics 40:877–885.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hines, A. H. andK. L. Comtois. 1985. Vertical distribution of infauna in sediments of a subestuary of central Chesapeake Bay.Estuaries 8:296–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holland, A. F., N. K. Mountford, M. H. Hiegel, K. R. Kaumeyer, andJ. A. Mihursky. 1980. Influence of predation on infaunal abundance in upper Chesapeake Bay, USA.Marine Biology 57:221–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holme, N. A. 1964. Methods of sampling the benthos.Advances in Marine Biology 2:171–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunsaker, C. T. and D. E. Carpenter. 1990. Ecological indicators for the Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPA 600/3-90/060. Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

  • Jones, C. G., J. H. Lawton, andM. Shachak. 1994. Organisms as ecosystem engineers.Oikos 69:373–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McIntyre, A. D., J. M. Elliott, andD. V. Ellis. 1984. Introduction: Design of sampling programmes, p. 1–26.In N. A. Holme and A. D. McIntyre (eds.), Methods for the Study of Marine Benthos. IBP Handbook No. 16, 2nd edition. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, U.K.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Brien, R. G. 1998. A tour of UnifyPow: A SAS module/macro for sample size analysis, p. 1346–1355. In Proceedings of the 23rd SAS Users Group International Conference. SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina.

  • Orth, R. J. 1973. Benthic infauna of eelgrass,Zostera marina beds.Chesapeake Science 14:258–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, T. H. andR. Rosenberg. 1978. Macrobenthic succession in relation to organic enrichment and pollution of the marine environment.Oceanography and Marine Biology: An Annual Review 16:229–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterman, R. M. 1990. Statistical power analysis can improve fisheries research and management.Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Scineces 47:2–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plumb, R. H. 1981. Procedures for handling and chemical analyses of sediment and water samples. U.S. Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report EPACE-81-1. Vicksburg, Mississippi.

  • Posey, M. H. 1986. Changes in a benthic community associated with dense beds of a burrowing deposit feeder,Callianassa californiensis.Marine Ecology Progress Series 31:15–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Posey, M. H., B. R. Dumbauld, andD. A. Armstrong. 1991. Effects of a burrowing mud shrimp,Upogebia pugettensis (Dana), on abundances of macro-infauna.Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 148:283–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puget Sound Estuary Program. 1997. Recommended protocols for sampling and analyzing subtidal benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages in Puget Sound. Recommended Protocols for Measuring Selected Environmental Variables in Puget Sound. Puget Sound Water Quality Authority, Olympia, Washington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rader, D. N. 1984. Salt-marsh benthic invertebrates: Small-scale paterns of distribution and abundance,Estuaries 7:413–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rees, H. L. 1984. A note on mesh selection and sampling efficiency in benthic studies.Marine Pollution Bulletin 15:225–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reise, K. 1985. Tidal Flat Ecology. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • SAS Institute Inc. 1985. SAS User's Guide: Basics, Version 5 edition. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina.

    Google Scholar 

  • Service, S. K. andR. J. Feller. 1992. Long-term trends of subtidal macrobenthos in North Inlet, South Carolina.Hydrobiologia 231:13–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simenstad, C. A., C. D. Tanner, and R. M. Thom. 1990. Estuarine wetland restoration monitoring protocol: Appendices. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency FRI-UW-89. Seattle, Washington.

  • Simenstad, C. A., C. D. Tanner, R. M. Thom, and L. L. Conquest. 1991. Estuarine habitat assessment protocol. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPA 910/9-91-037. Seattle, Washington.

  • Simpson, G. G., A. Roe, andR. C. Lewontin. 1960. Quantitative Zoology, revised edition. Harcourt, Brace and World, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sokal, R. R. andF. J. Rohlf. 1995. Biometry. The Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research, 3rd edition. W. H. Freeman and Company, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, Jr.,D. L. 1997. Variable density grid-based sampling designs for continuous spatial populations.Environmetrics 8: 167–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stickney, R. R., G. L. Taylor, andD. B. White. 1975. Food habits of five species of young southeastern United States estuarine Sciaenidae.Chesapeake Science 16:104–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swartz, R. C. 1978. Techniques for sampling and analyzing the marine macrobenthos. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPA-600/3-78-030. Corvallis, Oregon.

  • Toft, C. A. andP. J. Shea. 1983. Detecting community-wide patterns: Estimating power strengthens statistical inference.American Naturalist 122:618–625.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1991. Monitoring Guidance for the National Estuary Program, Interim Final. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPA 503/8-91-002. Washington, D.C.

  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1998. Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment, Risk Assessment Forum. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/630/R-95/002F. Washington, D.C.

  • Warwick, R. M. andK. R. Clarke. 1991. A comparison of some methods for analysing changes in benthic community structure.Journal of the Marine Biological Association U.K. 71:225–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, S. L. and J. B. Zedler. 1992. Restoring sustainable coastal ecosystems on the Pacific Coast. Establishing a research agenda. California Sea Grant College, University of California, Report No. T-CSGCP-026. La Jolla, California.

  • Zipperer, V. T. 1996. Ecological effects of the introduced cordgrass,Spartina alterniflora, on the benthic community structure of Willapa Bay, Washington, M.S. Thesis, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hatfield Marine Science Center, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2111 S. E. Marine Science Drive, 97365-5260, Newport, Oregon

    Steven P. Ferraro & Faith A. Cole

Authors
  1. Steven P. Ferraro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Faith A. Cole
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Steven P. Ferraro.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ferraro, S.P., Cole, F.A. Optimal benthic macrofaunal sampling protocol for detecting differences among four habitats in Willapa Bay, Washington, USA. Estuaries 27, 1014–1025 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02803427

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02803427

Keywords

Search

Navigation