Environmental Monitoring and Assessment

, Volume 102, Issue 1–3, pp 41–65 | Cite as

Environmentally stratified sampling design for the development of Great Lakes environmental indicators

  • Nicholas P. Danz
  • Ronald R. Regal
  • Gerald J. Niemi
  • Valerie J. Brady
  • Tom Hollenhorst
  • Lucinda B. Johnson
  • George E. Host
  • Joann M. Hanowski
  • Carol A. Johnston
  • Terry Brown
  • John Kingston
  • John R. Kelly
Article

Abstract

Understanding the relationship between human disturbance and ecological response is essential to the process of indicator development. For large-scale observational studies, sites should be selected across gradients of anthropogenic stress, but such gradients are often unknown for a population of sites prior to site selection. Stress data available from public sources can be used in a geographic information system (GIS) to partially characterize environmental conditions for large geographic areas without visiting the sites. We divided the U.S. Great Lakes coastal region into 762 units consisting of a shoreline reach and drainage-shed and then summarized over 200 environmental variables in seven categories for the units using a GIS. Redundancy within the categories of environmental variables was reduced using principal components analysis. Environmental strata were generated from cluster analysis using principal component scores as input. To protect against site selection bias, sites were selected in random order from clusters. The site selection process allowed us to exclude sites that were inaccessible and was shown to successfully distribute sites across the range of environmental variation in our GIS data. This design has broad applicability when the goal is to develop ecological indicators using observational data from large-scale surveys.

Keywords

anthropogenic stress ecological indicators GIS Great Lakes human disturbance gradient sampling design 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andreasen, J.K., O’Neill, R.V., Noss, R. and Slosser, N.C.: 2001, ‘Considerations for the development of a terrestrial index of ecological integrity’, Ecol. Indicators 1, 21–35.Google Scholar
  2. Austin, M.P. and Heyligers, P.C.: 1991, ‘Vegetation Survey Design, a New Approach: Gradsect Sampling’, in: C.R. Margules and M.P. Austin (eds), Nature Conservation: Cost Effective Biological Surveys and Data Analysis, CSIRO, Melbourne, pp. 31–36.Google Scholar
  3. Austin, J.E., Buhl, T.K., Guntenspergen, G.R., Norling, W. and Sklebar, H.T.: 2001, ‘Duck populations as indicators of landscape condition in the prairie pothole region’, Environ. Monit. Assess. 69, 29–47.Google Scholar
  4. Bailey, R.G.: 1989, ‘Explanatory supplement to the ecoregions map of the continents’, Environ. Conserv. 15(4), 307–309.Google Scholar
  5. Barber, M.C. (ed.): 1994, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program: Indicator Development Strategy, EPA/620/R-94/022. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Research Triangle Park, NC.Google Scholar
  6. Brazner, J.C.: 1997, ‘Regional, habitat, and human development influences on coastal wetland and beach fish assemblages in Green Bay, Lake Michigan’, J. Great Lakes Res. 23, 36–51.Google Scholar
  7. Brazner, J.C., Tanner, D.K., Jensen, D.A. and Lemke, A.: 1998, ‘Relative abundance and distribution of ruffe (Gymnocephalus cernuus) in a Lake Superior coastal wetland fish assemblage’, J. Great Lakes Res. 24, 293–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brazner, J.C. and Jensen, D.A.: 1999, ‘Zebra mussel [Dreissena polymorpha (Pallas)] colonization of rusty crayfish [Orconectes rusticus (Girard)] in Green Bay, Lake Michigan’, Am. Midland Nat. 143, 250–256.Google Scholar
  9. Cairns, J., Jr., McCormick, P.V. and Niederlehner, B.R.: 1993, ‘A proposed framework for developing indicators of ecosystem health’, Hydrobiol. 263, 1–44.Google Scholar
  10. Cleland, D.T., Avers, P.E., McNabb, W.H., Jensen, M.E., Bailey, R.G., King, T. and Russel, W.E.: 1997, ‘National Heirarchical Framework of Ecological Units’, in: M. S. Boyce and A. Haney (eds), Ecosystem Manage. Appl. Sustainable Forest and Wildlife Resour., Yale University Press, New Haven, CT, pp. 181–200.Google Scholar
  11. Cochran, W.G.: 1965, ‘The planning of observational studies of human populations’, J. R. Stat. Soc., Series A 128, 234–266.Google Scholar
  12. Cole, A.: 2002, ‘The assessment of herbaceous plant cover in wetlands as an indicator of function’, Ecol. Indicators 2, 287–293.Google Scholar
  13. Dale, V.H. and Beyeler, S.C.: 2001, ‘Challenges in the development and use of ecological indicators’, Ecol. Indicators 1, 3–10.Google Scholar
  14. Detenbeck, N., Johnston, C.A. and Niemi, G.J.: 1990, ‘Use of a Geographic Information System to Assess the Effect of Wetlands on Lake Water Quality in the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area’, in: Proceedings of the Minnesota Lake Management Conference, Brainerd, MN, pp. 81–85.Google Scholar
  15. Detenbeck, N.E., Johnston, C.A. and Niemi, G.J.: 1993, ‘Wetland effects on lake water quality in the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area,’ Landscape Ecol. 8, 39–61.Google Scholar
  16. Detenbeck, N.E., Galatowitsch, S.M., Atkinson, J. and Ball, H.: 1999, ‘Evaluating perturbations and developing restoration strategies for inland wetlands in the Great Lakes Basin,’ Wetlands 19, 789–820.Google Scholar
  17. Environment Canada and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: 2003, State of the Great Lakes 2003, EPA 905-R-03-004.Google Scholar
  18. Fore, L.: 2003, Developing Biological Indicators: Lessons Learned from Mid-Atlantic Streams, EPA 903/R-003/003. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental Information and Mid-Atlantic Integrated Assessment Program, Region 3, Ft. Meade, MD.Google Scholar
  19. Fore, L.S. and Grafe, C.: 2002, ‘Using diatoms to assess the biological condition of large rivers in Idaho (U.S.A.)’, Freshw. Biol. 47, 2015–2027.Google Scholar
  20. Gesch, D., Oimoen, M., Greenlee, S., Nelson, C., Steuck, M. and Tyler, D.: 2002, ‘The National Elevation Dataset’, Photogramm. Eng. Rem. Sens. 68(1), 5–12.Google Scholar
  21. Griffiths, R.W.: 1993, ‘Effects of Zebra Mussels (Dreissena polymorpha) on Benthic Fauna of Lake St. Clair’, in: T.F. Nalepa and D.W. Scholesser (eds), Zebra Mussels: Biology, Impacts, and Control, Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, MI, pp. 415–437.Google Scholar
  22. Hartmann, H.C.: 1990, ‘Climate change impacts on Laurentian Great Lakes levels,’ Clim. Change 17, 49–67.Google Scholar
  23. Herdendorf, C.E., Hartley, S.M. and Barnes, M.D. (eds): 1981, Fish and Wildlife Resources of the Great Lakes Coastal Wetlands Within the United States, Volumes 1–6. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS/OBS-81/02-v1-v6.Google Scholar
  24. Herlihy, A. T., Larsen, D. P., Paulsen, S. G., Urquhart, N. S. and Rosenbaum, B. J.: 2000, ‘Designing a spatially balanced, randomized site selection process for regional stream surveys: The EMAP mid-Atlantic pilot study’, Environ. Monit. Assess. 63, 95–113.Google Scholar
  25. Holland, A.F. (ed.): 1990, Near Coastal Plan for 1990, Estuaries, EPA/600/4-90/033. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Narragansett, RI.Google Scholar
  26. Hughes, R.M., Kaufmann, P.R., Herlihy, A.T., Kincaid, T.M., Reynolds, L. and Larsen, D.P.: 1998, ‘A process for developing and evaluating indices of fish assemblage integrity’, Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 55, 1618–1631.Google Scholar
  27. Hunsaker, C.T., Levine, D.A., Timmins, S.P., Jackson, B.L. and O’Neill, R.V.: 1992, ‘Landscape Characterization for Assessing Regional Water Quality’, in: D.H. McKenzie, D.E. Hyatt and V.J. McDonald (eds), Ecological Indicators, Elsevier, New York, NY, pp. 997–1006.Google Scholar
  28. Hunsaker, C.T. and Carpenter, D.E. (eds): 1990, Ecological Indicators for the Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program, EPA/600/3-90/060. Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Atmospheric Research and Exposure Assessment Laboratory.Google Scholar
  29. Jackson, L.E., Kurtz, J.C. and Fisher, W.S. (eds): 2000, Evaluation Guidelines for Ecological Indicators, EPA/620/R-99/005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Research Triangle Park, NC. 107p.Google Scholar
  30. Johnson, L.B. and Gage, S.H.: 1997, ‘Landscape approaches to the analysis of aquatic ecosystems’, Freshw. Biol. 37, 113–132.Google Scholar
  31. Johnston, C.A.: 1984, ‘Wetlands in the Wisconsin Landscape,’ Wisconsin Nat. Resour. 8, 4–6.Google Scholar
  32. Johnston, C.A., Detenbeck, N.E. and Niemi, G.J.: 1990, ‘The cumulative effects of wetlands on stream water quality and quantity: A landscape approach’, Biogeochem. 10, 105–141.Google Scholar
  33. Johnston, C.A. and Meysembourg, P.: 2002, ‘Comparison of the Wisconsin and national wetlands inventories’, Wetlands 22(2), 386–405.Google Scholar
  34. Karr, J.R. and Chu, E.W.: 1999, Restoring Life in Running Waters: Better Biological Monitoring, Island Press, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  35. Kennish, M.J.: 2002, ‘Environmental threats and environmental future of estuaries,’ Environ. Conserv. 29, 78–107.Google Scholar
  36. Keough, J.R., Thompson, T.A., Guntenspergen, G.R. and Wilcox, D.A.: 1999, ‘Hydrogeomorphic factors and ecosystem responses in coastal wetlands of the Great Lakes,’ Wetlands 19(4), 821–834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Keys, J.E., Jr., Carpenter, C.A., Hooks, S.L., Koeneg, F.G., McNab, W.H., Russell, W.E. and Smith, M.L.: 1995, Ecological Units of the Eastern United States–First Approximation, Technical Publication R8-TP 21. Map (scale 1:3,500,000). Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service.Google Scholar
  38. Kunkel, K., Changon, S.A., Croley II, T.E. and Quinn, F.H.: 1998, ‘Transposed climates for study of water supply variability on the Laurentian Great Lakes’, Climate Change 38, 387–404.Google Scholar
  39. Larsen, D.P., Thornton, K.W., Urquhart, N.S. and Paulsen, S.G.: 1994, ‘The role of sample surveys for monitoring the condition of the nation’s lakes’, Environ. Monit. Assess. 32, 101–134.Google Scholar
  40. Magnuson, J.J., Webster, K.E., Assel, R.A., Bowser, C.J., Dillon, P.J., Eaton, J.G., Evans, H.E., Fee, E.J., Hall, R.I., Mortsch, L.R., Schindler, D.W. and Quinn, F.W.: 1997, ‘Potential effects of climate changes on aquatic systems: Laurentian Great Lakes and Precambrian shield region’, Hydrolog. Proc. 11, 825–871.Google Scholar
  41. Minc, L.D. and Albert, D.A.: 1998, ‘Great Lakes Coastal Wetlands: Abiotic and Floristic Characterization’, Michigan Natural Features Inventory, Lansing, MI.Google Scholar
  42. Mortsch, L.D.: 1998, ‘Assessing the impact of climate change on the Great Lakes shoreline wetlands’, Climate Change 40, 391–416.Google Scholar
  43. Mortsch, L.D. and Quinn, F.H.: 1996, ‘Climate change scenarios for Great Lakes Basin ecosystem studies’, Limnol. Oceanogr. 41, 903–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Natural Resource Council (NRC): 2000, Ecological Indicators for the Nation, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  45. National Wetlands Inventory (NWI): 1990, Photointerpretation Conventions for the National Wetlands Inventory, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory Center, St. Petersburg, FL.Google Scholar
  46. Nichols, J., Bradbury, S. and Swartout, J.: 1999, ‘Derivation of wildlife values for mercury’, J. Toxicol. Environ. Health, Part B 2, 325–355.Google Scholar
  47. Norton, S.B., Cormier, S.M., Smith, M. and Christian Jones, R.: 2000, ‘Can biological assessments discriminate among types of stress? A case study from the Eastern Corn Belt Plains ecoregion’, Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 19, 1113–1119.Google Scholar
  48. O’Connell, T.J., Jackson, L.E. and Brooks, R.P.: 1998, ‘A bird community index of biotic integrity for the Mid-Atlantic Highlands’, Environ. Monit. Assess. 51, 145–156.Google Scholar
  49. O’Connor, R.J., Walls, T.E. and Hughes, R.M.: 2000, ‘Using multiple taxonomic groups to index the ecological condition of lakes’, Environ. Monit. Assess. 61, 207–228.Google Scholar
  50. Olsen, A.R., Sedransk, J., Edwards, D., Gotway, C.A., Liggett, W., Rathburn, S., Reckhow, K.H. and Young, L.J.: 1999, ‘Statistical issues for monitoring ecological and natural resources in the United States’, Environ. Monit. Assess. 54, 1–45.Google Scholar
  51. Osenberg, C.W., Schmitt, R.J., Holbrook, S.J., Abu-Sara, K.E. and Flegal, A.R.: 1994, ‘Detection of environmental impacts: Natural variability, effect size, and power analysis’, Ecol. Appl. 4, 16–30.Google Scholar
  52. Overton, W.S. and Stehman, S.V.: 1995, ‘Design implications of anticipated data uses for comprehensive monitoring programmes’, Environ. Ecol. Stat. 2, 287–303.Google Scholar
  53. Rencher, A.C.: 1995, Methods of Multivariate Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  54. Richards, C., Johnson, L.B. and Host, G.E.: 1996, ‘Landscape-scale influence on stream habitats and biota’, Can. J. Fish Aquatic Sci. 53, 295–311.Google Scholar
  55. Richards, C. and Johnson, L.B.: 1998, ‘Landscape Perspectives on Ecological Risk Assessment’, in: M.C. Newman and C.L. Strojan (eds), Risk Assessment: Logic and Measurement, Ann Arbor Press, Chelsea, MI, pp. 255–274.Google Scholar
  56. Royall, R.M.: 1970. ‘On finite population sampling theory under certain linear regression models’, Biometrika 57(2), 377–387.Google Scholar
  57. SAS Institute: 2000, SAS OnlineDoc®,Version 8. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.Google Scholar
  58. Schreuder, H.T., Gregoire, T.G. and Weyer, J.P.: 2001, ‘For what applications can probability and non-probability sampling be used?’, Environ. Monit. Assess. 66, 281–291.Google Scholar
  59. Seaber, P.R., Kapinos, F.P. and Knapp, G.L.: 1987, Hydrologic Unit Maps, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2294, 63 p.Google Scholar
  60. Simon, T.P., Jankowski, R. and Morris, C.: 2000, ‘Modification of an index of biotic integrity for assessing vernal ponds and small palustrine wetlands using fish, crayfish, and amphibian assemblages along southern Lake Michigan’, Aquat. Ecosys. Health Manage. 3, 407–418.Google Scholar
  61. Skalski, J.R.: 1990, ‘A design for long-term status and trends monitoring’, J. Environ. Manage. 30, 139–144.Google Scholar
  62. Stevens, Jr., D.L. and Urquhart, N.S.: 2000, ‘Response designs and support regions in sampling continuous domains’, Environmetrics 11, 13–41.Google Scholar
  63. Stevens, Jr., D.L. and Olsen, A.R.: 1999, ‘Spatially restricted surveys over time for aquatic resources’, J. Agric. Biol. Environ. Stat. 4, 415–428.Google Scholar
  64. Suter II, G.W., Norton, S.B. and Cormier, S.M.: 2002, ‘A methodology for inferring the causes of observed impairments in aquatic ecosystems’, Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 21, 1101–1111.Google Scholar
  65. The Nature Conservancy: 1994, The Conservation of Biological Diversity in the Great Lakes Ecosystem: Issues and Opportunities, The Nature Conservancy Great Lakes Program. Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  66. Urquhart, N.S., Overton, W.S. and Birks, D.S.: 1993, ‘Chapter 3. Comparing Sampling Designs for Monitoring Ecological Status and Trends: Impact of Temporal Patterns’, in Barnett and Turkmann (eds), Stat. Environ., John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, pp. 71–85.Google Scholar
  67. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: 1994, The U.S. EPA Reach File Version 3.0 Alpha Release (RF3-Alpha) Technical Reference, Office of Water, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  68. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: 1998, ‘Guidelines for ecological risk assessment’, EPA/630/R-95/002Fa, Federal Register 63(93), 26846–26924.Google Scholar
  69. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: 2002, A Framework for Assessing and Reporting on Ecological Condition: An SAB Report, EPA-SAB-EPEC-02-009, EPA Science Advisory Board, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  70. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Government of Canada: 1995, The Great Lakes: An Environmental Atlas and Resource, U.S. EPA, Chicago, IL. 46 pp.Google Scholar
  71. Vitousek, P.M., Aber, J., Howarth, R.W., Likens, G.E., Matson, P.A., Schindler, D.W., Schlesinger, W.H. and Tilman, G.D.: 1997, ‘Human Alteration of the Global Nitrogen Cycle: Causes and Consequences’, Issues in Ecology 1, Special publication, Ecological Society of America. 15 pp.Google Scholar
  72. Vogelmann, J.E., Howard, S.M., Yang, L., Larson, C.R., Wylie, B.K. and Van Driel, N.: 2001, ‘Completion of the 1990s National Land Cover Data Set for the Conterminous United States from Landsat Thematic Mapper Data and Ancillary Data Sources’, Photogramm. Eng. Rem. Sens. 67, 650–652.Google Scholar
  73. Weisberg, S.B., Frithsen, J.B., Holland, A.F., Paul, J.F., Scott, K.J., Summers, J.K., Wilson, H.T., Valente, R., Heimbuch, D.G., Gerritsen, J., Schimmel, S.C. and Latimer, R.W.: 1993, EMAP-Estuaries Virginian Province 1990 Demonstration Project Report, EPA 620/R-93/006, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory, Narragansett, RI.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicholas P. Danz
    • 1
  • Ronald R. Regal
    • 2
  • Gerald J. Niemi
    • 1
    • 3
  • Valerie J. Brady
    • 1
  • Tom Hollenhorst
    • 1
  • Lucinda B. Johnson
    • 1
  • George E. Host
    • 1
  • Joann M. Hanowski
    • 1
  • Carol A. Johnston
    • 4
  • Terry Brown
    • 1
  • John Kingston
    • 1
  • John R. Kelly
    • 5
  1. 1.Center for Water and the Environment, Natural Resources Research InstituteUniversity of Minnesota DuluthDuluthUSA
  2. 2.Department of Mathematics and StatisticsUniversity of Minnesota DuluthDuluthUSA
  3. 3.Department of BiologyUniversity of Minnesota DuluthDuluthUSA
  4. 4.Center for Biocomplexity StudiesSouth Dakota State UniversityBrookingsUSA
  5. 5.Mid-Continent Ecology DivisionU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyDuluthUSA

Personalised recommendations