Hydrobiologia

, Volume 118, Issue 1, pp 59–66 | Cite as

Nematode species abundance patterns and their use in the detection of environmental perturbations

  • H. M. Platt
  • K. M. Shaw
  • P. J. D. Lambshead
Article

Abstract

If the concepts of biological indices and biomonitoring at the multi-species level are to prove viable, then meiofauna and marine nematodes in particular should be an ideal group with which to test the hypothesis. Many attempts to assess the structure of species assemblages, such as the use of diversity indices, nematode: copepod ratios and the graphical method of log normal plots, have been shown to be theoretically unsound and/or impractical, especially for routine use by extension workers. A method of assessing shifts in dominance patterns which involves all the proportional species abundances is suggested as a better means of comparing diversity. A modified method of rapidly assessing Simpson's dominance-weighted diversity index is also advocated as being of practical use. In combination, they should enable the diversity aspect of the multi-species approach to biomonitoring to be rigorously and exhaustively evaluated.

Keywords

meiofauna diversity species abundance pollution biomonitoring marine benthos nematodes 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Amjad, S. & J. S. Gray, 1983. Use of the nematode-copepod ratio as an index of organic pollution. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 14: 178–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cairns, J. Jr., 1981. Biological monitoring, 6. Future needs. Wat. Res. 15: 941–952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cairns, J. Jr., 1982. Biological monitoring in water pollution. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp.Google Scholar
  4. Cairns, J. Jr., D. W. Albaugh, F. Busey & M. D. Chanay, 1968. The sequential comparison index — a simplified method for non-biologist to estimate relative differences in biological diversity in stream pollution studies. J. Wat. Pollut. Cont. Fed. 40: 1607–1613.Google Scholar
  5. Cairns, J. Jr. & K. L. Dickson, 1971. A simple method for the biological assessment of the effects of waste discharges on aquatic bottom-dwelling organisms. J. Wat. Pollut. Cont. Fed. 43: 755–772.Google Scholar
  6. Coull, B. C., G. R. F. Hicks & J. B. J. Wells, 1981. Nematode: copepod ratios for monitoring pollution: a rebuttal. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 12: 378–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dennis, B. & G. P. Patil, 1979. Species abundance, diversity, and environmental predictability. In J. F. Grassle, G. P. Patil, W. Smith & C. Taille (eds.), Ecological Diversity in Theory and Practice. International Co-operative Publishing House, Burtonsville: 93–114.Google Scholar
  8. Ferris, V. R. & J. M. Ferris, 1979. Thread worms (Nematoda). In C. W. Hart & S. L. H. Fuller (eds.), Pollution Ecology of Estuarine Invertebrates. Academic Press, Lond.: 1–33.Google Scholar
  9. Gray, J. S., 1981. The Ecology of Marine Sediments. Cambridge University Press, 185 pp.Google Scholar
  10. Gray, J. S. & F. B. Mirza, 1979. A possible method for detecting pollution-induced disturbances in marine benthic communities. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 10: 142–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hennig, H. F.-K., J. A. Eagle, L. Fielder, A. H. Fricke, W. J. Gledhill, P. J. Greenwood & M. J. Orrens, 1983. Ratio and population density of psammolittoral meiofauna as a perturbation indicator of sandy beaches in South Africa. Envir. monit. Ass. 3: 45–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Herricks, E. E. & J. Cairns, Jr., 1982. Biological monitoring, 3. receiving system methodology based on community structure. Wat. Res. 16: 141–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Huston, M., 1979. A general hypothesis of species diversity. Am. Nat. 113: 81–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kempton, R. A. & L. R. Taylor, 1974. Log-series and log-normal parameters as diversity discriminants for the Lepidoptera. J. anim. Ecol. 43: 381–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lambshead, P. J. D., H. M. Platt & K. M. Shaw, 1983. Detection of differences among assemblages of benthic species based on an assessment of dominance and diversity. J. nat. Hist., Lond. 17: 859–874.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. MacArthur, R. H., 1972. Geographical Ecology. Harper & Row, N.Y.Google Scholar
  17. May, R. M., 1975. Patterns of species abundance and diversity. In M. L. Cody & J. M. Diamond (eds.), Ecology and Evolution in Communities. Belknap Press, Cambridge, Mass.: 81–120.Google Scholar
  18. Mirza, F. B. & J. S. Gray, 1981. The fauna of benthic sediments from the organically enriched Oslofjord, Norway. J. exp. mar. Biol. Ecol. 54: 181–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Patil, G. P. & C. Taillie, 1976. Ecological diversity; concepts, indices, and applications. Proc. 9th int. biometric conf., Boston.Google Scholar
  20. Patil, G. P. & C. Taillie, 1977. Diversity as a concept and its implications for random communities. Bull. int. statist. Inst. 47: 497–515.Google Scholar
  21. Platt, H. M., 1977. Ecology of free-living marine nematodes from an intertidal sanflat in Strangford Lough, Northern Ireland. Estuar. coast. mar. Sci. 5: 685–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Platt, H. M. & R. M. Warwick, 1980. The significance of freeliving nematodes to the littoral ecosystem. In J. H. Price, D. E. G. Irvine & W. F. Farnham (eds.), The Shore Environment, 2. Ecosystems. Academic Press, Lond.: 729–759.Google Scholar
  23. Platt, H. M. & R. M. Warwick, 1983. Freeliving marine nematodes, 1. British enoplids. In D. M. Kermack & R. S. K. Barnes (eds.), Synopses of the British Fauna (New Series). Cambridge University Press 28: 303 pp.Google Scholar
  24. Raffaelli, D., 1981. Monitoring with meiofauna — a reply to Coull, Hicks and Wells (1981) and additional data. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 12: 381–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Raffaeli, D., 1982. An assessment of the potential of major meiofauna groups for monitoring organic pollution. Mar. Envir. Res., 7: 151–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Raffaelli, D. G. & C. F. Mason, 1981. Pollution monitoring with meiofauna, using the ratio of nematodes to copepods. Mar. Pollut. Bull., 12: 158–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Shaw, K. M., P. J. D. Lambshead & H. M. Platt, 1983. Detection of pollution-induced disturbance in marine benthic assemblages with special reference to nematodes. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 11: 195–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Warwick, R. M., 1981. The nematode: copepod ratio and its use in pollution ecology. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 12: 329–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Dr W. Junk Publishers 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. M. Platt
    • 1
  • K. M. Shaw
    • 2
  • P. J. D. Lambshead
    • 1
  1. 1.Nematode SectionBritish Museum (Natural History)LondonU.K.
  2. 2.Biometrics and Computing SectionBritish Museum (Natural History)LondonU.K.

Personalised recommendations