Effects of Iron on Benthic Macroinvertebrate Communities in the Field

Article

Abstract

Matched chemical and ecological monitoring data were used to assess the effects of iron on benthic macroinvertebrate communities. Three measures of iron exposure: dissolved, total, and particulate iron were assessed. Ecological responses were normalised to an unimpacted reference condition to make site-specific predictions of the reference condition. Ecological data were expressed as an Ecological Quality Index (EQI), indicating quality relative to the reference condition. Quantile regression analysis was used to derive thresholds as an EQI value equivalent to the cut-off between good and moderate ecological status for water quality classification. Thresholds for Good Ecological Status ranged from 1.25 to 2.46 mg L−1 depending on the measure of exposure and ecological response.

Keywords

Quality standard Iron Benthic invertebrates RIVPACS 

References

  1. Cade B, Terrel J, Schroeder R (1999) Estimating effects of limiting factors with regression quantiles. Ecology 80:311–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Clarke R, Murphy J (2006) Effects of locally rare taxa on the precision and sensitivity of RIVPACS bioassessment of freshwaters. Freshw Biol 51:1924–1940CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Clarke RT, Furse MT, Davy-Bowker J (2003a) Analysis of 1995 survey data: phase 1 post-survey appraisal. Unit I: changes in biological condition. Environment Agency, R&D Technical Report E103, Environment Agency, BristolGoogle Scholar
  4. Clarke RT, Wright JF, Furse MT (2003b) RIVPACS models for predicting the expected macroinvertebrate fauna and assessing the ecological quality of rivers. Ecol Model 160:219–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Clarke R, Davy-Bowker J, Sandin L, Friberg N, Johnson R, Bis B (2006) Estimates of comparisons of the effects of sampling variation using “national” macroinvertebrate sampling protocols on the precision of metrics used to assess ecological status. Hydrobiologia 566:477–503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Crane M, Kwok KWH, Wells C, Whitehouse P, Lui GCS (2007) Use of field data to support European Water Framework Directive quality standards for dissolved metals. Environ Sci Technol 41:5014–5021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. De Schamphelaere KAC, Janssen CR (2004) Development and field validation of a biotic ligand model predicting chronic copper toxicity to Daphnia magna. Environ Toxicol Chem 23:1365–1375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Deleebeeck NME, De Schamphelaere KAC, Janssen CR (2008) A novel method for predicting chronic nickel bioavailability and toxicity to Daphnia magna in artificial and natural waters. Environ Toxicol Chem 27:2097–2107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Environment Agency (2007) Proposed EQS for Water Framework Directive Annex VIII substances: iron (total dissolved). SC040038/SR9 Environment Agency, BristolGoogle Scholar
  10. Heijerick DG, De Schamphelaere KAC, Van Sprang PA, Janssen CR (2005) Development of a chronic zinc biotic ligand model for Daphnia magna. Ecotoxicol Env Saf 62:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Linton TK, Pacheco MAW, McIntyre DO, Clement WH, Goodrich-Mahoney J (2007) Development of bioassessment based benchmarks for iron. Environ Toxicol Chem 26:1291–1298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. OECD (2007) SIDS initial assessment profile: iron salts category. (available from: http://cs3-hq.oecd.org/scripts/hpv/accessed 02/12/09)
  13. Pacheco M, McIntyre D, Linton T (2005) Integrating chemical and biological criteria. Environ Toxicol Chem 24:2983–2991CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Peruanen S, Vuorinen P, Vuorinen M, Hollender A (1994) The effects of iron, humic acids and low pH on the gills and physiology of brown trout (Salmo trutta). Ann Zool Fennici 31:389–396Google Scholar
  15. Van Sickle J, Larsen D, Hawkins C (2007) Exclusion of rare taxa affects the performance of the O/E index in bioassessments. J N Am Benthol Soc 26:319–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Vuorinen P, Keianen M, Peuranen S, Tigerstedt C (1999) Effects of iron, aluminium, dissolved humic material and acidity on grayling (Thymallus thymallus) in laboratory exposures, and a comparison of sensitivity with brown trout (Salmo trutta). Boreal Environ Res 3:405–419Google Scholar
  17. Wright JF, Sutcliffe DW, Furse MT (2000) Assessing the biological quality of fresh waters: RIVPACS and other techniques. Freshwater Biological Association, AmblesideGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.WCA Environment Ltd.FaringdonUK
  2. 2.Rio TintoSouth JordanUSA

Personalised recommendations