, Volume 603, Issue 1, pp 83–104 | Cite as

Multi-attribute ecological river typology for assessing ecological condition and conservation planning

Primary research paper


A river classification framework is needed to make good management and planning decisions about river health and biodiversity. We developed a multi-attribute ecological river typology to address this need in the Australian State of New South Wales (801,428 km2). Multivariate patterns in data collected from 322 reference sites were used to define river types for each attribute: abiotic features (10 types), fish assemblages (6 types) and macroinvertebrate assemblages from river edges (8 types) and riffle zones (5 types). We used classification tree analysis to define broad regions for each attribute and then to construct identification keys for river types within each region using slope, elevation, maximum distance from source, latitude and mean annual rainfall. These keys allow the mapping of the likely spatial extent of river types and the assignment of a multi-attribute river-type identity to a river reach anywhere in the State. We used the average dissimilarity distances among the river types and the rates of misclassification of reference sites to assess the reliability of the assignments for different attributes in different regions. This approach to river classification can be applied anywhere in the world, resulting in simple to highly complex typologies depending on data availability. In data-poor areas it may result in a single attribute typology based on remotely derived variables and a coarsely defined reference condition. In data-rich areas the typology may have a large number of attributes using very large datasets with high resolution.


River typology Macroinvertebrates Fish Conservation planning Ecoregion Reference condition 


  1. Abell, R. A., D. M. Olson, E. Dinerstein, P. T. Hurley, J. T. Diggs, W. Eichbaum, S. Walters, W. Wettengel, T. Allnut, C. J. Loucks & P. Hedao, 1999. Freshwater Ecoregions of North America. A Conservation Assessment. Island Press, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
  2. Angermeier, P. L. & R. A. Smogor, 1995. Estimating the number of species and relative abundances of stream-fish communities: effects of sampling effort and discontinuous spatial distributions. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 52: 936–949.Google Scholar
  3. Arthington, A. H. & C. J. Marshall, 1996. Threatened fishes of the world: Nannoperca oxleyana Whitley, 1940 (Nannopercidae). Environmental Biology of Fishes 46: 150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baattrup-Pedersen, A., K. Szoszkiewicz, R. Nijboer, M. O’Hare & T. Ferreira, 2006. Macrophyte communities in unimpacted European streams: variability in assemblage patterns, abundance and diversity. Hydrobiologia 566: 179–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Belbin, L., 1994. Pattern Analysis Package. CSIRO Division of Wildlife and Rangelands Research, Canberra.Google Scholar
  6. Biodiversity Advisory Committee, 1992. A National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia’s Biological Diversity. Draft for public comment. Department of the Arts, Sport, the Environment and Territories, Canberra.Google Scholar
  7. Breiman, L., J. H. Friedman, R. A. Olshen & C. J. Stone, 1984. Classification and Regression Trees. Wadsworth, Belmont, California.Google Scholar
  8. Brierley, G. J. & K. Fryirs, 2005. Geomorphology and River Management: Applications of the River Styles Framework. Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  9. Chessman, B., 2006. Prediction of riverine fish assemblages through the concept of environmental filters. Marine and Freshwater Research 57: 601–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chessman, B., I. Growns, J. Currey & N. Plunkett-Cole, 1999. Predicting diatom communities at the genus level for the rapid biological assessment of rivers. Freshwater Biology 41: 317–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clarke, K. R & R. M. Warwick, 1994. Change in marine communities: an approach to statistical analysis and interpretation. Natural Environment Research Council, UK, 144 pp.Google Scholar
  12. Clarke R. T., J. F. Wright & M. T. Furse, 2003. RIVPACS models for predicting the expected macroinvertebrate fauna and assessing the ecological quality of rivers. Ecological Modelling 160: 219–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Clifford, H. C. & W. C. Stephenson, 1975. An Introduction to Numerical Classification. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  14. Cooper, S. D., L. Barmuta, O. Sarnelle, K. Kratz & S. Diehl, 1997. Quantifying spatial heterogeneity in streams. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 16: 174–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cooper, S. D., S. Diehl, K. Kratz & O. Sarnelle, 1998. Implications of scale for patterns and processes in stream ecology. Australian Journal of Ecology 23: 27–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Davies, N., R. H. Norris & M. C. Thoms, 2000. Prediction and assessment of local stream habitat features using large-scale catchment characteristics. Freshwater Biology 45: 343–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Davy-Bowker, J., R. T. Clarke, R. K. Johnson, J. Kokes, J. F. Murphy & S. Zahrádková, 2006. A comparison of the European Water Framework Directive physical typology and RIVPACS-type models as alternative methods of establishing reference conditions for benthic macroinvertebrates. Hydrobiologia 566: 91–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Department of Environment, Conservation, 2006. New South Wales State of the Environment 2006. Department of Environment and Conservation, Sydney NSW. http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/soe/soe2006/ (last accessed on 21 November 2007).Google Scholar
  19. Department of Environment and Water Resources, 2007. Australia’s Biogeographical Regions. http://www.environment.gov.au/parks/nrs/ibra/index.html (last accessed on 21 November 2007).
  20. Department of Sustainability and Environment, 2005. Index of Stream Condition: The Second Benchmark of Victorian River Condition. Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne August 2005. http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/CA256F310024B628/0/6791EE801B121BD2CA25725F000AC2E4/$File/2ISC+Report+01+Introduction.pdf (last accessed on 21 November 2007).
  21. Doledec, S. & B. Statzner, 1994. Theoretical habitat templates, species traits, and species richness: 548 plant and animal species in the Upper Rhone River and its floodplain. Freshwater Biology 31: 523–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dollar, E. S. J., C. S. James, K. H. Rogers & M. C. Thoms, 2007. A framework for interdisciplinary understanding of rivers as ecosystems. Geomorphology 89: 147–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Downes, B. J., P. S. Lake & E. S. G. Schreiber, 1993. Spatial variation in the distribution of stream invertebrates; implications of patchiness for models of community organisation. Freshwater Biology 30: 119–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Eekhout, S., J. M. King, A. Wackernagel, 1997. Classification of South African Rivers. Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Pretoria.Google Scholar
  25. European Commission, 2000. Directive 2000/60/EC. Establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. PE-CONS 3639/1/100 Rev 1., European Commission, Luxemburg.Google Scholar
  26. Fieseler, C. & C. Wolter, 2006. A fish based typology of small temperate rivers in the northeastern lowlands of Germany. Limnologica 36: 2–16.Google Scholar
  27. Ferrier, S., 2002. Mapping spatial pattern in biodiversity for regional conservation planning: where to from here? Systematic Biology 51: 331–363.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ferrier, S., 2006. Spatial modelling of biodiversity at the community level. Journal of Applied Ecology 43: 393–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Fitzsimons, J. A. & H. A. Robertson, 2005. Freshwater Reserves in Australia: directions and challenges for the development of comprehensive, adequate and representative system of protected areas. Hydrobiologia 552: 87–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Frissell, C. A., W. J. Liss, C. A. Warren & M. D. Hurley, 1986. A hierarchical framework for stream habitat classification. Environmental Management 10: 119–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gauch, H. G. Jr., 1982. Multivariate Analysis in Community Ecology. Cambridge University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  32. Gehrke, P. C., 1997. Species richness and composition of freshwater fish communities in New South Wales Rivers. In Harris, J. & P. C. Gehrke (eds), Fish and Rivers in Stress. The NSW Rivers Survey. NSW Fisheries Office of Conservation and the Cooperative Research Centre for Freshwater Ecology, Sydney, 103–132.Google Scholar
  33. Gerritsen, J. B., M. T. Barbour & K. King, 2000. Apples, oranges, and ecoregions: on determining pattern in aquatic assemblages. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 19: 487–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Green, R. H, 1979. Sampling Design and Statistical Methods for Environmental Biologists, 1st edition. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  35. Harden, G. J., 1990. Flora of New South Wales. New South Wales University Press, Sydney.Google Scholar
  36. Hart, B. T. & I. C. Campbell, 1994. Ecological River Classification Scheme for Australia. In Uys, M. C. (ed.), Classification of Rivers, and Environmental Health Indicators. Proceedings of a Joint South African/Australian Workshop. February 7–14, 1994. Cape Town, South Africa. Water Research Commission Report No. TT 63/94, 87–100.Google Scholar
  37. Hawkins, C. P. & M. R. Vinson, 2000. Weak correspondence between landscape classifications and stream invertebrate assemblages: implications for bioassessment. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 19: 501–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hawkins, C. P., R. H. Norris, J. Gerritsen, R. M. Hughes, S. K. Jackson, R. K. Johnson & R. J. Stevenson, 2000. Evaluation of the use of landscape classifications for the prediction of freshwater biota: synthesis and recommendations. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 19(3): 541–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hering, D., O. Moog, L. Sandin & P. F. M. Verdonschot, 2004. Overview of the application of the AQEM assessment system. Hydrobiologia 510: 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Higgins, J. V., M. T. Bryer, M. L. Khoury & T. W. Fitzhugh, 2005. A freshwater classification approach for biodiversity conservation planning. Conservation Biology 19: 432–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hose, G. & E. Turak, 2006. River Health in the New South Wales Lower North Coast, Hunter and Central Coast Catchments. River Health Bioassessment Report No. 41. Department of the Environment and Heritage, and NSW Department of Environment and Conservation. http://www.environment.gov.au/water/publications/environmental/rivers/nrhp/catchments-nsw/index.html (last accessed 21 November 2007).
  42. Hunter, M. L. Jr., 1991. Coping with Ignorance: The Coarse Filter Strategy for Maintaining Biodiversity. In Kohm, K. (ed.), Balancing on the Brink of Extinction: The Endangered Species Act and Lessons for the Future. Island Press, Washington, DC, 266–281.Google Scholar
  43. Johnson, R. K., D. Hering, M. Furse & R. T. Clarke, 2006 Detection of ecological change using multiple organism groups: metrics and uncertainty. Hydrobiologia 566: 115–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Jowett, I. G. & J. Richardson, 1995. Fish communities in New Zealand rivers and their relationship to environmental variables. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 37: 347–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kauffman, L. & P. J. Rousseeuw, 1990. Finding Groups in Data. An Introduction to Cluster Analysis. John Wiley & Sons, Sydney.Google Scholar
  46. Kingsford, R.T., H. Dunn, D. Love, J. Nevill, J. Stein & J. Tait, 2005. Protecting Australia’s rivers, wetlands and estuaries of high conservation value: a blueprint. Report to Land and Water Australia, Canberra. http://www.environment.gov.au/water/publications/environmental/protecting-rivers.html. (last accessed on 21 November 2007).
  47. Kruskal, J. B. & M. Wish, 1978. Multidimensional Scaling. Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, no 07-011. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA.Google Scholar
  48. Linke, S., H. R. Norris, D. P. Faith & D. Stockwell, 2005. ANNA: A new prediction method for comparative bioassessment methods. Freshwater Biology 50: 147–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Marchant, R., F. Wells & P. Newall, 2000. Assessment of an ecoregion approach for classifying macroinvertebrate assemblages from streams in Victoria, Australia. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 19: 497–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Marchant, R., D. Ryan & L. Metzeling, 2006. Regional and local species diversity patterns for lotic invertebrates across multiple drainage basins in Victoria. Marine and Freshwater Research 57: 675–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Margules, C. R. & R. Pressey, 2000. Systematic conservation planning. Nature 405: 243–253.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Minshall, G. W., K. W. Cummins, R. C. Petersen, C. E. Cushing, D. A. Bruns, J. R. Sedell & R. L. Vannote, 1985. Developments in stream ecosystem theory. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 42: 1045–1055.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Minshall, G. W., R. C. Petersen, K. W. Cummins, T. L. Bott, J. R. Sedell, C. E. Cushing & R. L. Vannote, 1983. Interbiome comparison of stream ecosystem dynamics. Ecological Monographs 53: 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Mulholland, P. J., 1997. Dissolved organic matter concentration and flux in streams. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 16: 131–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Murray-Darling Basin Commission, 2004. Sustainable Rivers Audit Pilot Audit. Macroinvertebrate Theme. Technical Report 07/04. Canberra.Google Scholar
  56. Mykrae, H., J. Heino & T. Muotka, 2004. Variability of lotic macroinvertebrate assemblages and stream habitat characteristics across hierarchical landscape classifications. Environmental Management 34: 341–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Nijboer, R. C., R. K. Johnson, P. F. M. Verdonschot, M. Sommerhauser & A. Buffagni, 2004. Establishing reference condition in European streams. Hydrobiologia 516: 91–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Noda, T., 2004. Spatial hierarchical approach in community ecology: a way beyond high context dependency and low predictability in local phenomena. Population Ecology 46: 105–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. O’Keefe, J. H. & M. Uys, 2000. The role of classification in the conservation of rivers. In Boon, P. J., B. R. Davies & G. E. Petts (eds), Global Perspectives on River Conservation. Science, Policy, Practice. John Wiley, 445–458.Google Scholar
  60. O’Neill, R. V., D. L. DeAngelis, J. B. Waide & T. F. H. Allen, 1986. A Hierarchical Concept of Ecosystems. Princeton University press, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  61. NSW Department of Water Resources, 1994. Pinneena. New South Wales River Basin Maps. NSW Department of Water Resources, Sydney.Google Scholar
  62. Paavola, R., T. Muotka, R. Virtanen, J. Heino & P. Kreivi, 2003. Are biological classifications of headwater streams concordant across multiple taxonomic groups? Freshwater Biology 48: 1912–1923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. R Development Core Team, 2004. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. ISBN 3-900051-00-3, URL http://www.R-project.org. In R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna.
  64. Sandin, L. & R. K. Johnson, 2000. Ecoregions and benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages of Swedish streams. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 19: 462–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Sandin, L. & P. F. M. Verdonschot, 2006. Stream and river typologies: major results and conclusions from the STAR project. Hydrobiologia 566: 33–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. SAS Institute, 1998. SAS/STAT User’s Guide. Release 6.03 Edition, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.Google Scholar
  67. Simpson, J. C. & R. H. Norris, 2000. Biological assessment of river quality: development of AUSRIVAS models and outputs. In Wright, J. F., D. W. Sutcliffe & M. T. Furse (eds), Assessing the Biological Quality of Freshwaters: RIVPACS and Other Techniques. Freshwater Biological Association, Cumbria, UK.Google Scholar
  68. Snelder, T. H. & Biggs B. J. F., 2002. Multiscale river environment classification for water resources management. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 38: 1225–1239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. ter Braak, C. J. F. & P. Šmilauer, 2002. Canoco Reference Manual and CanoDraw for Windows User’s Guide. Software for Canonical Community Ordination (version 4.5). Biometris, Wgeningen and Ceské Budejovice.Google Scholar
  70. Thackway, R. & I. D. Cresswell, 1995. An Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation of Australia: A Framework for Establishing the National System of Reserves, Version 4.0. Australian Nature Conservation.Google Scholar
  71. Therneau, T. M. & E. J. Atkinson, 1997. An Introduction to Recursive Partitioning Using RPART Routines. Technical Report 61. Mayo Clinic, Section of Statistics.Google Scholar
  72. Thieme, M., R. Abell, M. L. J. Stiassny, P. Skelton, 2005. Freshwater Ecoregions of Africa and Madagascar. A Conservation Assessment. Island Press. Washington D.C.Google Scholar
  73. Thieme, M., B. Lehner, R. A. Abell, S. K. Hamilton, J. Kellndorfer, G. Powell & J. C. Riveros, 2007. Freshwater conservation planning in data poor areas: an example from a remote Amazonian basin (Madre de Dios River, Peru and Bolivia). Biological Conservation 135: 500–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Thoms, M. C., S. M. Hill, M. J. Spry, X. J. Chen, T. J. Mount, F. Sheldon, 2004. The geomorphology of the Darling River. In Breckwodt, R., R Boden & J. Andrew (eds), The Darling. Murray-Darling Basin Commission, Canberra, 68–103.Google Scholar
  75. Turak, E., 2007. An Ecological Typology of the Rivers of New South Wales, Australia. PhD thesis. University of Technology Sydney, NSW, Australia.Google Scholar
  76. Turak, E., L. K. Flack, R. H. Norris, J. Simpson & N. Waddell, 1999. Assessment of river condition at a large spatial scale using predictive models. Freshwater Biology 41: 283–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Turak, E., G. Hose & N. Waddell, 2002. Australia-wide Assessment of River Health: New South Wales Bioassessment Report (NSW Final Report), Monitoring River Health Initiative Technical Report no 2a. Commonwealth of Australia and NSW Environment Protection Authority, Canberra and Sydney http://www.environment.gov.au/water/publications/environmental/rivers/nrhp/nsw/index.html (last accessed on 21 November 2007).
  78. Turak, E. & N. Waddell, 2002. Development of AusRivAS Models for NSW (NSW Final Report). Monitoring River Heath Initiative Technical Report no. 10. Commonwealth of Australia and NSW Environment Protection Authority, Canberra and Sydney. Online document http://ausrivas.canberra.edu.au/Bioassessment/Macroinvertebrates/Man/Sampling/NSW/NSW_Model_Development.pdf (last accessed on 21 November 2007).
  79. Turak, E., N. Waddell & G. Johnstone, 2004. New South Wales Australian River Assessment System (AUSRIVAS) Sampling and Processing Manual. Commonwealth of Australia and NSW Department of Environment and Conservation, Canberra and Sydney. Commonwealth of Australia and NSW Department of Environment and Conservation, Canberra and Sydney. http://ausrivas.canberra.edu.au/Bioassessment/Macroinvertebrates/Man/Sampling/NSW/NSW_Ausrivas_protocol_Version2_2004.pdf, (last accessed on 21 November 2007).
  80. Unmack, P. J., 2001. Biogeography of Australian Freshwater Fishes. Journal of Biogeography 28(9): 1052–1089.Google Scholar
  81. van Sickle, J. & R. M. Hughes, 2000. Classification strengths of ecoregions, catchments and geographic clusters for aquatic vertebrates in Oregon. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 19: 370–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Venables, W. N. & B. D. Ripley, 2002. Modern Applied Statistics with S-Plus, 4th edition. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  83. Verdonschot, P. F. M. & R. C. Nijboer, 2004. Testing the European stream typology of the water framework directive for macroinvertebrates. Hydrobiologia 516: 35–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Wiens, J. A., 1989. Spatial scaling in ecology. Functional Ecology. 3: 385–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Wiens, J. A., 2000. Ecological heterogeneity: an ontogeny of concepts and approaches. In Hutchins, M. J., E. A. John & A. J. A. Stewart (eds), The Ecological Consequences of Environmental Heterogeneity. Blackwell Science, Oxford, 9–31.Google Scholar
  86. Waite, I. R., A. T. Herlihy, D. P. Larsen & D. J. Klemm, 2000. Comparing strengths of geographic and non-geographic classifications of stream nethic macroinvertebrates in the Mid-Atlantic highlands, USA. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 19(3): 429–441.Google Scholar
  87. Warry, D. N. & M. Hanau, 1993. The use of terrestrial ecoregions as a regional-scale screen for selecting representative reference sites for water quality monitoring. Environmental Management 17(2): 267–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Wells, F., L. Metzeling & P. Newall, 2002. Macroinvertebrate regionalisation for use in the management of aquatic ecosystems in Victoria, Australia. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 74: 271–294.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Wright, J. F,, 2000. An introduction to RIVPACS. In Wright, J. F., D. W. Sutcliffe & M. T. Furse (eds), Assessing the Biological Quality of Freshwaters: RIVPACS and Other Techniques. Freshwater Biological Association, Cumbria, UK.Google Scholar
  90. Wright, J. F., D. Moss, P. D. Armitage & M. T. Furse, 1984. A preliminary classification of running-water sites in Great Britain based on macroinvertebrate species and the prediction of community type using environmental data. Freshwater Biology 14: 221–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Environment and Climate ChangeSydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations