Advertisement

Development of macroinvertebrate multimetric index for ecological evaluation of a river in North Central Nigeria

  • A. O. EdegbeneEmail author
  • L. A. Elakhame
  • F. O. Arimoro
  • E. C. Osimen
  • O. N. Odume
Article
  • 34 Downloads

Abstract

A macroinvertebrate-based multimetric index was developed for River Chanchaga, North Central Nigeria. Macroinvertebrates and physicochemical variables were sampled seasonally between March 2017 and February 2018 from four stations: station 1 (least impacted control station) and three downstream stations 2, 3 and 4. A total of 29 macroinvertebrate metrics in four categories, richness, abundance, composition and diversity, were evaluated for their potential to discriminate between the stations, seasonal stability and redundancy. Of the 29 metrics, only 13 fulfilled all criteria and were then integrated into the final Chanchaga multimeric index (MMIchanchaga). Application of the newly developed multimetric index revealed that water quality at stations 2 and 3 was fair and that of station 4 was poor. Water quality deteriorated slightly during the rainy season compared with the dry season. In terms of the individual component metrics, EPT richness, EPT (%) and Shannon diversity were highly sensitive to water quality impairment. The Bray–Curtis similarity measure revealed that stations 2 and 3 were more similar compared with the similarity between other stations. Overall, the newly developed multimetric index proved useful and represents the first important step in such index development in Nigeria.

Keywords

% EPT Multimetric index Environmental deterioration Biomonitoring MMIchanchaga River Chanchaga 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the doctoral research grant awarded to the first author (grant no. 110894) by the South African National Research Foundation (NRF) and the World Academy of Science (TWAS). We thank Mr. Obinnah Odoh, Mr. Prince Ossai, Helen Adekunle, Meshack Sanda, Hassana and Mrs. Edegbene Ovie Tega for their field, laboratory and technical assistance.

References

  1. APHA (American Public Health Association). (1998). Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater (20th ed.). USA: WEF and AWWA 1213Pp.Google Scholar
  2. Arimoro, F. O., & Ikomi, R. B. (2008). Response of macroinvertebrate communities to abattoir wastes and other anthropogenic activities in a municipal stream in the Niger Delta, Nigeria. Environmentalist, 28, 85–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arimoro, F. O., & Ikomi, R. B. (2009). Ecological integrity of Upper Warri River, Niger Delta using aquatic insects as bioindicators. Ecological Indicators, 9, 455–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arimoro, F. O., Odume, O. N., Uhunoma, S. I., & Edegbene, A. O. (2015). Anthropogenic impact on water chemistry and benthic macroinvertebrate associated changes in a southern Nigeria stream. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 187, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baptista, D. F., Buss, D. F., Egler, M., Giovanelli, A., Silveira, M. P., & Nessimian, J. L. (2007). A multimetric index based on benthic macroinvertebrates for evaluation of Atlantic Forest streams at Rio de Janeiro state, Brazil. Hydrobiologia, 575, 83–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barber-James, H. M., Gattolliat, J., Sartori, M., & Hubbard, M. D. (2008). Global diversity of mayflies (Ephemeroptera, Insecta) in freshwater. Hydrobiologia, 595, 339–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barbour, M. T., Gerritsen, J., Snyder, B. D., & Stribling, J. B. (1999). Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in streams and wadeable Rivers: Periphyton, Benthic macroinvertebrates and fish (2nd ed.. EPA 841–13–99-002). Washington, D.C: Environmental Protection Agency; Office of water.Google Scholar
  8. Bonada, N., Prat, N., Resh, V. H., & Statzner, B. (2006). Development in aquatic insect biomonitoring: a comparative analysis of recent approaches. Annual Review of Entomology, 51, 495–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Camargo, J. A., Alonso, A., & De la Puente, M. (2004). Multimetric assessment of nutrient enrichment in impounded rivers based on bethic macroinvertebrates. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 96, 233–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Clarke, K. R., & Warwick, R. M. (1994). Change in marine communities: an approach to statistical analysis and interpretation. UK: Plymouth marine laboratory.Google Scholar
  11. Cranston, P. S. (2000). Electronic guide to the Chironomidae of Australia. http://www.entomologyucdavis.edu/chiropage. 29/08/2013.
  12. Dallas, H. F., Lowe, S., Kennedy, M. P., Saili, K., & Murphy, K. J. (2018). Zambian invertebrate scoring system (ZISS): a macroinvertebrate-based biotic index for rapid bioassessment of southern tropical African river systems. African Journal of Aquatic Science, 43(4), 325–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Edegbene, A. O. (2018). Invasive grass (Typha domingensis): A potential menace on the assemblage and abundance of migratory/water related birds in Hadejia-Nguru wetlands, Yobe State, Nigeria. Tropical Freshwater Biology, 27(2), 13–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Edegbene, A. O., & Arimoro, F. O. (2012). Ecological status of Owan River, southern Nigeria using aquatic insects as bioindicators. Journal of Aquatic Sciences, 27, 99–111.Google Scholar
  15. Edegbene, A. O., Arimoro, F. O., Odoh, O., & Ogidiaka, E. (2015). Effect of anthropogenicity on the composition and diversity of aquatic insects of a municipal river in North Central Nigeria. Biosciences Research in Today’s World, 1, 69–80.Google Scholar
  16. Gerber, A., & Gabriel, M. J. M. (2002). Aquatic invertebrates of South African Rivers—field guide. In Resource quality services. Pretoria: Department of Water Affairs.Google Scholar
  17. Golfieri, B., Surian, N., & Hardersen, S. (2018). Towards a more comprehensive assessment of river corridor conditions: a comparison between the morphological quality index and three biotic indices. Ecological Indicators, 84, 525–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gordon, N. D., McMahon, T. A., & Finlayson, B. L. (1994). Stream hydrology, an introduction for ecologists. New York: Wiley 526pp.Google Scholar
  19. Hammer, Ø., Harper, D. A. T., & Ryan, P. D. (2001). PAST: paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontologia Electronica, 4(1) 9Pp. http://palaeo-electronica.org/2001_1/past/issue1_01.htm. Accessed 1 July 2015.
  20. Hawkins, C. P., Norris, R. H., Hogue, J. N., & Feminella, J. W. (2000). Development and evaluation of predictive models for measuring the biological integrity of streams. Ecological Applications, 10, 1456–1477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Helson, J. E., & Williams, D. D. (2013). Development of a macroinvertebrate multimetric index for the assessment of low-land streams in the neotropics. Ecological Indicators, 29, 167–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kaaya, L. T., Day, J. A., & Dallas, H. F. (2015). Tanzania River Scoring System (TARISS): a macroinvertebrate-based biotic index for rapid bioassessment of river. African Journal of Aquatic Science, 40(2), 109–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mereta, S. T., Boets, P., De Meester, L., & Goethals, P. L. M. (2013). Development of multimetric index based on benthic macroinvertebrates for the assessment of natural wetlands in southwest Ethiopia. Ecological Indicators, 29, 510–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Merritt, R. W., Wallace, J. R., Higgins, M. J., Alexander, M. K., Berg, M. B., Morgan, W. T., Cummins, K. W., & Vandeneeden, B. (1996). Procedures for the functional analysis of invertebrate communities of the Kissimmee river-floodplain ecosystem. Florida Scientist, 59, 216–274.Google Scholar
  25. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Wetlands and water synthesis. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  26. Monaghan, K., & Soares, A. M. V. M. (2012). Bringing new knowledge to an old problem: building a biotic index from lotic macroinvertebrates traits. Ecological Indicators, 20, 213–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Odume, O. N. (2014). An evaluation of macroinvertebrate-based biomonitoring and ecotoxicological assessments of deteriorating environmental water quality in the Swartkops River, South Africa. Unpublsihed Ph. D thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of Rhodes University. 373Pp.Google Scholar
  28. Odume, O. N., Muller, W. J., Arimoro, F. O., & Palmer, C. G. (2012). The impact of water quality deterioration on macroinvertebrate communities in the Swartkops River, South Africa: a multimetric approach. African Journal of Aquatic Science, 37, 191–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ogbeibu, A.E. (2005). Biostatistics: a practical approach to research and data handling. Benin City: Mindex publishing, 264Pp.Google Scholar
  30. Rosenberg, D. M., & Resh, V. H. (Eds.). (1993). Freshwater biomonitoring and benthic macroinvertebrates (Vol. 10119). New York: Chapman and Hall one penn plaza.Google Scholar
  31. Shull, D. R., Smith, Z. M., & Selckmann, G. M. (2019). Development of a benthic macroinvertebrate multimeric index for large semiwadeable rivers in the Mid-Atlantic region of the USA. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 191.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-018-7153-x.
  32. Smith, M. J., Key, W. R., & Edward, D. H. D. (1999). AUSRIVAS: using macroinvertebrates to assess ecological condition of rivers in Western Australian. Freshwater Biology, 41, 269–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Suriano, M. T., Gessener, A. A., Roque, F. O., & Froehlich, C. G. (2011). Choice of macroinvertebrate metrics to evaluate stream conditions in Atlantic Forest, Brazil. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 175, 87–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. UN-(United Nations) Water. (2011). Water quality http://www.unwater.org/donwloads/waterquality policybrief.pdf. Accessed: 1 July, 2015.
  35. Vlek, H. E., Sporka, F., & Krno, I. (2006). Influence of macroinvertebrate sample size on bio assessment of streams. Hydrobiologia, 566, 523–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zamora-Muniz, C., Sainz-Cantero, C. E., Sanchez-Ortega, A., & Alba-Tercedor, J. (1995). Are biological indices BMPW and APT and their significance regarding water quality seasonally dependent? Factor explaining their variations. Water Research, 29, 285–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biological Sciences (Applied Hydrobiology and Fisheries Unit)Sule Lamido UniversityKafin HausaNigeria
  2. 2.Unilever Centre for Environmental Water Quality, Institute for Water ResearchRhodes UniversityGrahamstownSouth Africa
  3. 3.Department of ZoologyAmbrose Alli UniversityEkpomaNigeria
  4. 4.Department of Animal Biology (Applied Hydrobiology Unit)Federal University of TechnologyMinnaNigeria

Personalised recommendations