, Volume 180, Issue 1, pp 213–227 | Cite as

The role of oligochaetes in the management of waters

  • Piet F. M. Verdonschot
Part four: Community studies and pollution biology


To better understand the role of an aquatic oligochaete in the management of water quality, it was determined if oligochaetes were representative of water quality, if indices based on oligochaetes were widely applicable to access water quality, and if oligochaete assemblages were related to environmental factors other than organic pollution. It was found that if only one monitoring sample a year was taken in December, about 73% of the more common species were collected. Seasonality did not seem to affect the taxa collected except for forms in low presence, e.g., Nais. Several indices we used were not applicable to regulated streams. Oligochaete ordination procedures revealed only a partial picture of the environmental conditions of regulated streams.

Key words

oligochaetes regulated streams indices ordination 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aston, R. J., 1973. Tubificids and water quality: a review. Envir. Pollut. 5: 1–10.Google Scholar
  2. Beltman, B., 1984. Management of ditches. The effect of cleaning of ditches on the water coenoses. Verh. int. Ver. Limnol. 22: 2022–2028.Google Scholar
  3. Brinkhurst, R. O., 1964. Observations on the biology of lake dwelling Tubificidae (Oligochaeta). Arch. Hydrobiol. 60: 385–418.Google Scholar
  4. Brinkhurst, R. O., 1966. Taxonomical studies on the Tubificinae (Annelida, Oligochaeta). Int. Revue ges. Hydrobiol. Suppl. 51: 727–742.Google Scholar
  5. Brinkhurst, R. O., 1967. The Tubifidicae (Oligochaeta) of polluted waters. Verh. int. Ver. Limnol. 16: 854–859.Google Scholar
  6. Brinkhurst, R. O., K. E. Chua & N. K. Kaushik, 1972. Interspecific interactions and selective feeding of tubificid oligochaetes. Limnol. Oceanogr. 17: 122–133.Google Scholar
  7. Chapman, P. M., G. A. Vigers, M. A. Farrell, R. N. Dexter, E. A. Quinlan, R. M. Kocan & M. L. Landolt, 1982. Survey of biological effects of toxicants upon Puget Sound biota. I. Broadscale toxicity surveys. U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA Tech. Memo. OMPA-25, 98 pp.Google Scholar
  8. Chekanovskaya, O. V., 1962. The aquatic oligochaete fauna of the U.S.S.R. Opred. Faune SSR 78: 1–411 (in Russian).Google Scholar
  9. Dzwillo, M., 1966. Untersuchungen über die Zusammensetzung der Tubificidenfauna im Hamburger Hafen. Abh. Verh. natruw. Ver. Hamburg (NF) 11: 101–106.Google Scholar
  10. Elliott, J. M., 1971. Some methods for the statistical analysis of samples of benthic invertebrates. Freshwat. Biol. Ass. Sc. Publ. 25, 148 pp.Google Scholar
  11. Goodnight, C. J. & L. S. Whitley, 1960. Oligochaetes as indicators of pollution. Proc. 15th. Ann. Waste Conf., Purdue Univ., 139–142.Google Scholar
  12. Guhl, W., 1987. Aquatic ecosystem characterizations by biotic indices. Int. Revue ges. Hydrobiol. 72: 431–455.Google Scholar
  13. Hammen, H. van der, T. H. L. Claassen & P. F. M. Verdonschot, 1985. Manual for hydrobiological surveys. Rep. IAWM, working group hydrobiology, 61 pp. (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  14. Healy, B. & T. Bolger, 1984. The occurrence of species of semi-aquatic Enchytraeidae (Oligochaeta) in Ireland. Hydrobiologia 115: 159–170.Google Scholar
  15. Hiltunen, J. K., 1967. Some oligochaetes from Lake Michigan. Trans. am. microsc. Soc. 86: 433–454.Google Scholar
  16. Howmiller, R. P. & M. A. Scott, 1977. An environmental index based on relative abundance of oligochaete species. J. Wat. Pollut. Cont. Fed. 49: 809–815.Google Scholar
  17. Juget, J., 1984. Oligochaeta of the epigean and underground fauna of the alluvial plain of the French upper Rhône (biotypoligical trial). Hydrobiologia 115: 175–182.Google Scholar
  18. Kennedy, C. R., 1965. The distribution and habitat of Limnodrilus Claparéde and its adaptive significance. Oikos 16: 26–28.Google Scholar
  19. Kolkwitz, R. & M. Marsson, 1909. Ökologie der tierischen Saprobien. Int. Revue ges. Hydrobiol. 2: 126–152.Google Scholar
  20. Lafont, M., 1977. Les Oligochètes et la détection des pollutions dans les cours d'eau. L'eau et l'Industrie 17: 84–85.Google Scholar
  21. Lafont, M., 1985. Oligochaetes and pollution in the sediments of rivers: an improved index of biological quality. CEMAGREF, Lyon, 10 pp.Google Scholar
  22. Lafont, M., 1987. Production of Tubificidae in the littoral zone of Lake Léman near Thonon-les-Bains: a methodological approach. Hydrobiologia 155: 179–187.Google Scholar
  23. Lang, C., 1984. Eutrophication of Lakes Léman and Neuchâtel (Switzerland) indicated by oligochaete communities. Hydrobiologia 115: 131–138.Google Scholar
  24. Lauritsen, D. D., S. C. Mozley & D. S. White, 1985. Distribution of oligochaetes in Lake Michigan and 9omments on their uses as indices of pollution. J. Great Lakes Res. 11: 67–76.Google Scholar
  25. Lothspeich, F. B., 1980. Watersheds as the basic ecosystem: this conceptual framework provides a basis for a natural classification system. Wat. Res. Bull. 16: 581–586.Google Scholar
  26. Mauch, E., 1976. Leitform der Saprobität fur die biologische Gewässeranalyse. Cour. Forsch. Inst. Senckenberg 21: 584–593.Google Scholar
  27. Milbrink, G., 1973. On the use of indicator communities of Tubificidae and some Lumbriculidae in the assessment of water pollution in Swedish lakes. ZOON 1: 125–139.Google Scholar
  28. Milbrink, G., 1980. Oligochaete communities in pollution biology. The European situation with special reference to lakes in Scandinavia. In: R. O. Brinkhurst & D. G. Cook (Eds.), Aquatic Oligochaete Biology. Plenum Publ. Corp., N.Y., 433 pp.Google Scholar
  29. Milbrink, G., 1983. An improved environmental index based on the relative abundance of oligochaete species. Hydrobiologia 102: 89–97.Google Scholar
  30. Mozley, S. C. & R. P. Howmiller, 1977. Environmental status of the Lake Michigan region: Zoobenthos of Lake Michigan. Argonne National Lab. Report ANL/ES-40, Vol. 6.Google Scholar
  31. Needham, P. R. & R. L. Usinger, 1956. Variability in the macrofauna of a single riffle in Prosser Creek, California, as indicated by the Surber samples. Hilgardia 24: 383–409.Google Scholar
  32. Newrkla, P. & N. Wijegoonawardna, 1987. Vertical distribution and abundance of benthic invertebrates in profundal sediments of Mondsee, with special reference to oligochaetes; Hydrobiologia 155: 227–234.Google Scholar
  33. Paoletti, A. & B. Sambugar, 1984. Oligochaeta of the middle Po River (Italy): principal component analysis of the benthic data. Hydrobiologia 115: 145–152.Google Scholar
  34. Pfannuche, O., 1977. Oekologische und systematische Untersuchungen an naidomorphen Oligochaeten brackiger und limnischer Biotope. Diss. Univ. Hamburg, 138 pp.Google Scholar
  35. Preston, F. W., 1948. The commonness, and rarity, of species. Ecology 29: 254–283.Google Scholar
  36. Sîarkkä, J., 1969. The bottom fauna at the mouth of the river Kokemaenjoki, southwestern Finland. Ann. zool. fenn. 6: 275–288.Google Scholar
  37. Särkkä, J., 1987. The occurrence of oligochaetes in lake chains receiving pulp mill waste and their relation to eutrophication on the trophic scale. Hydrobiologia 155: 259–266.Google Scholar
  38. Slepukhina, T. D., 1984. Comparison of different methods of water quality evaluation by means of oligochaetes. Hydrobiologia 115: 183–186.Google Scholar
  39. Ter Braak, C. J. F., 1987. CANOCO — a FORTRAN program a for canonical community ordination by [partial] [detrended] [canonical] correspondence analysis and redundancy analysis. ITI-TNO, Wageningen, 95 pp.Google Scholar
  40. Tolkamp, H. H., 1984. Biological assessment of water quality in running water using macroinvertebrates: a case study in Limburg, The Netherlands. Wat. Sci. Tech. 17: 867–878.Google Scholar
  41. Tolkamp, H. H. & J. J. P. Gardiners, 1977. Hydrobiological survey of lowland streams in the Achterhoek (The Netherlands) by means of a system for the assessment of water quality and stream character based on macroinvertebrates. Mitt. Inst. Wasserwirtschaft, Hydrologie u. Landwirtschaft. Wasserbau, T.U. Hannover 41: 215–235.Google Scholar
  42. Tongeren, O. van, 1986. FLEXCLUS, an interactie flexible cluster program. Acta Bot. Neerl. 35: 137–142.Google Scholar
  43. Uzunov, Y., 1979. Aquatic Oligochaeta: a supplement to the list of limnosaprobic bioindicators. Proc. Bulg. Acad. Sci. 32: 1101–1103.Google Scholar
  44. Verdonschot, P. F. M., 1983. Ecological characterization of surface waters in the province of Overijssel (The Netherlands). H2O 16: 574–579 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  45. Verdonschot, P. F. M., 1984. The distribution of aquatic oligochaetes in the fenland area of N.W. Overijssel (The Netherlands). Hydrobiologia 115: 215–222.Google Scholar
  46. Verdonschot, P. F. M., 1987. Aquatic Oligochaetes in ditches. Hydrobiologia 115: 283–292.Google Scholar
  47. Verdonschot, P. F. M. & J. A. Schot, 1987. Macrofaunal community-types in helocrene springs. Ann. Rep. 1986. Res. Inst. for Nature Manag., Arnhem: 85–103.Google Scholar
  48. Wachs, B., 1967. Die Oligochaeten Fauna der Fliessgewasser unter besonder Berücksichtigung der Beziehungen zwisschen der Tubificiden Beseidlung und dem Substrat. Arch. Hydrobiol. 63: 310.Google Scholar
  49. Wegl, R., 1983. Index für die Limnosaprobität. Wasser und Abwasser 26: 146–148.Google Scholar
  50. Wiederholm, T., 1980. Use of benthos in lake monitoring. J. Wat. Pollut. Cont. Red. 52: 537–547.Google Scholar
  51. Woodiwiss, F. S., 1976. The Trent Catchment and Biological Sampling Stations. Sec. Techn. Sem. ‘Biological Water Assessment Methods’, Nottingham.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Piet F. M. Verdonschot
    • 1
  1. 1.Research Institute for Nature Management, Department of HydrobiologyZR LeersumThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations