Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

An evaluation of benthic macroinvertebrate biomass methodology

Part 1. Laboratory analytical methods

  • 262 Accesses

  • 11 Citations

Abstract

Evaluation of analytical methods employed for wet weight (live or preserved samples) of benthic macroinvertebrates reveals that centrifugation at 140 x gravity for one minute yields constant biomass estimates. Less relative centrifugal force increases chance of incomplete removal of body moisture and results in weighing error, while greater force may rupture fragile macroinvertebrates, such as mayflies. Duration of specimen exposure in ethanol, formalin, and formol (formaling-ethanol combinations) causes significant body weight loss with within 48 hr formalin and formol cause less body weight loss than ethanol. However, as all preservatives tested cause body weight loss, preservation time of samples collected for comparative purposes should be treated uniformly. Dry weight estimates of macroinvertebrates are not significantly affected by kind of preservative or duration of exposure. Constant dry weights are attained by oven drying at 103 °C at a minimum of four hours or vacuum oven drying (15 inches of mercury pressure) at 103 °C for a minimum of one hour. Although requiring more time in preparation than oven drying and inalterably changing specimen body shape, freeze drying (10 microns pressure, -55 °C, 24 hr) provides constant dry weights and is advantageous for long term sample storage by minimizing curatorial attention. Constant ash-free dry weights of macroinvertebrate samples are attained by igniting samples at 500–550 °C for a minimum of one hour with slow cooling to room temperature in desiccators before weighing.

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

References

  1. CravenR. E. and BrownB. E.: 1969, ‘Ecology of Hexagenia naiads (Insecta-Ephemeridae) in an Oklahoma Reservoir’, Amer. Midland Natur. 82(2), 346–358.

  2. CrispD. J.: 1971, ‘Energy Flow Measurements’, in N. A.Holme and A. D.McIntyre (eds.), Methods for the Study of Marine Benthos, International Biological Programme Handbook No. 16. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, 334 pp.

  3. DendyJ. S., PardueG. B., and AggusL. R.: 1971, ‘Disposable Planchets for Weighing Macrobenthos’, Prog. Fish Cultl. 33(3), 184.

  4. EdmondsonW. T.: 1971, ‘Methods for Processing Samples and Developing Data’, in W. T.Edmondson and G. G.Winberg (eds.), A Manual on Methods for the Assessment of Secondary Productivity in Fresh Waters, International Biological Programme Handbook No. 17. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, 358 pp.

  5. GolightlyC. G.Jr., and KosinskiR. J.: 1981, ‘Estimating the Biomass of Freshwater Mussels (Bivalvia:-Unionidae) from Shell Dimensions’, Hydrobiologia 80, 263–267.

  6. HowmillerR. P.: 1971. ‘Effects of some Common Preservatives on the Weight of Tubificid Worms and Chironomid Larvae’, University of Michigan. Center for Great Lakes Study, Ann Arbor, 5 pp.

  7. Khmeleva, N. N.: 1971, ‘Ratio of Wet to Dry Weight in the Isopod Idotea Baltica Basteri from the Black Sea’, translated from: Gibrobiologicheskig Zhurnal (Hydrobiological Journal) 7(2), 95–100.

  8. LovegroveT.: 1971, ‘The Effects of Various Factors on Dry Weight Values’, Rapp. Cons. Explor. 153, 86–91.

  9. MaloneC. R. and NelsonD. J.: 1969, ‘Feeding Rates of Freshwater Snails (Goniobasis clavaeformis) Determined with Cobalt’, Ecology 50(4), 728–730.

  10. MasonW. T.Jr., WeberI., Lewis, and JulianE. C.: 1973, ‘Factors Affecting the Performance of Basket and Multiplate Macroinvertebrate Samplers’, Freshwater Biology 3, 409–436.

  11. PatersonC. G.: 1982, ‘Energy Distribution in Biomass Estimates within a Freshwater Bivalve Community’, Can. J. Zool. 60, 2753–2756.

  12. PatteeE.: 1968, ‘Relation entre poids frais et poids sec chez quelques invertebres d'eau douce’, Hydrobiologia 32(3–4), 417–420.

  13. PowersC. F. and AlleyW. F.: 1967, ‘Some Preliminary Observations on the Depth Distribution of Macrobenthos in Lake Michigan’, Special Rept. 30. Great Lakes Res. Div., Inst. Sci. and Tech., Univ. Michigan, Ann Arbor.

  14. SlackH. D.: 1967, ‘A Brief Survey of the Profundal Benthos Fauna of Lakes in Manitoba’, J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 24(5), 1017–1033.

  15. StanfordJ. A.: 1973, ‘A Centrifuge Method for Determining Live Weights of Aquatic Insect Larvae, with a Note on Weight Loss in Preservatives’, Ecology 54(2), 449–451.

  16. SugdenG.: 1967, ‘A Technique for Weighing Live Aquatic Invertebrates’, Limnol. and Oceanogr. 12(3), 557.

  17. SugdenG.: 1970, ‘Some Aspects of Structure and Function of Benthic Macroinvertebrate Population in a Spring’, Amer. Midland Natur. 84(1), 20–35.

Download references

Author information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mason, W.T., Lewis, P.A. & Weber, C.I. An evaluation of benthic macroinvertebrate biomass methodology. Environ Monit Assess 3, 29–44 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00394030

Download citation

Keywords

  • Biomass
  • Body Weight Loss
  • Biomass Estimate
  • Benthic Macroinvertebrates
  • Sample Storage