Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Are landscape-based wetland condition indices reflected by invertebrate and diatom communities?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Wetlands Ecology and Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Assessments of wetland condition are generally based on measures of variables related to plants or large animals (birds, fish), and catchment or landscape features. This approach ignores the considerable biodiversity and functional values of small aquatic organisms. The aim of this study was to assess the correspondence between landscape-based indices of wetland condition and the community composition of both aquatic invertebrates and diatoms across a broad range of wetlands in the West Coast region of New Zealand. Aquatic invertebrates and diatoms were sampled from 29 lowland wetlands subject to varying degrees of catchment modification. Wetland condition was assessed independently using two methods: a field-based method to give the Wetland Condition Index, and a GIS-based method that gave an Index of Ecological Integrity. Strong relationships existed between community composition and pH, so we partitioned the community data into groups according to wetland pH. We found only weak relationships between wetland condition scores and invertebrate and diatom communities within each pH group. In most cases, data describing the nutrient status of the water had the strongest influence on invertebrate and diatom communities. Lack of strong associations between measured wetland condition indices and either diatom or invertebrate community composition suggests that neither index was dominated by variables directly influencing the aquatic component of wetland biota. The challenges now are to identify the critical variables, and to develop complementary wetland scoring systems that better reflect the status of small aquatic organisms.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • APHA (1975) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 14th edn. American Public Health Association, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Ausseil A-G, Gerbeaux P, Chadderton WL, Stephens T, Brown DJ, Leathwick J (2008) Wetland ecosystems of national importance for biodiversity. Criteria, methods and candidate list of nationally important inland wetlands. Prepared for the Department of Conservation, Wellington, New Zealand

    Google Scholar 

  • Balcombe CK, Anderson JT, Fortney RH, Kordek WS (2005) Aquatic macroinvertebrates assemblages in mitigated and natural wetlands. Hydrobiologia 541:175–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barbour MT, Gerritsen J, Griffith GE, Frydenborg R, McGarron E, White JS, Bastian MJ (1996) A framework for biological criteria for Florida streams using benthic macroinvertebrates. J N Am Benthol Soc 15:185–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Battarbee RW, Charles DF, Dixit SS, Renberg I (1999) Diatoms as indicators of surface water acidity. In: Stoermer EF, Smol JP (eds) The diatoms: applications for the environmental and earth sciences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 85–127

    Google Scholar 

  • Batzer DP, Wissinger SA (1996) Ecology of insect communities in nontidal wetlands. Ann Rev Entomol 41:75–100

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Batzer DP, Rader RB, Wissinger SA (1999) Invertebrates in freshwater wetlands of North America: ecology and management. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs BJF (1985) The use of periphyton in the monitoring of water quality. In: Pridmore RD, Cooper AB (eds) Biological monitoring in freshwaters: proceedings of a seminar. Water Soil Misc Publ 82:117–142

  • Biggs BJF (1989) Biomonitoring of organic pollution using periphyton, South Branch, Canterbury, New Zealand. N Z J Mar Freshw Res 23:263–274

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Biggs BJF, Kilroy C (2000) Stream periphyton monitoring manual. Ministry for the Environment, Wellington, New Zealand

    Google Scholar 

  • Birks HJB, Line J, Juggins S, Stevenson AC, ter Braak CJF (1990) Diatoms and pH reconstruction. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B 327:263–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown MT, Vivas MB (2005) Landscape development intensity index. Environ Monit Assess 101:289–309

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burton TM, Uzarski DG, Gathman JP, Genet JA, Keas BE, Stricker CA (1999) Development of a preliminary invertebrate index of biotic integrity for Lake Huron coastal wetlands. Wetlands 19:869–882

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson BR, Sorrell BK, Reeves PN, Champion PD, Partridge TR, Clarkson BD (2003) Handbook for monitoring wetland condition (Revised October 2004). Coordinated monitoring of New Zealand Wetlands. Ministry for the Environment, Sustainable Management Fund Project (5105), Wellington

  • Cummins T, Farrell EP (2003) Biogeochemical impacts of clearfelling and reforestation on blanket-peatland streams II. Major ions and dissolved organic carbon. For Ecol Manag 180:557–570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis JA, Froend R (1999) Loss and degradation of wetland in South Western Australia: underlying causes, consequences and solutions. Wetlands Ecol Manag 7:13–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis J, Horwitz PHJ, Norris R, Chessman BC, McGuire M, Sommer B (2006) Are river bioassessment methods using macroinvertebrates applicable to wetlands? Hydrobiologia 572:115–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Department of Sustainability and Environment (2005) The index of wetland condition. Conceptual framework and selection of measures. The State of Victoria Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond DH (2003) Determination of nitrate in brackish or seawater by flow injection analysis. QuikChem Method 31-107-04-1-A for Lachat Instruments. Lachat Instruments, Milwaukee, WI

    Google Scholar 

  • Dodds WK (2002) Freshwater ecology. Concepts and environmental applications. Academic, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  • Duggan IC, Collier KC, Lambert P (2003) Evaluation of invertebrate biometrics and the influence of subsample size using data from some Westland, New Zealand, lowland streams. N Z J Mar Freshw Res 36:117–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fennessy MS, Jacobs AD, Kentula ME (2004) Review of methods for assessing wetland condition. EPA/620/R-04/009. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Foged N (1979) Diatoms in New Zealand. The North Island. Biblio Phycol 47:1–224

    Google Scholar 

  • Gascón S, Boix, Salal J (2009) Are biodiversity metrics related to the same factors? A case study from Mediterranean wetlands. Biol Conserv 142:2602–2612

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gee JHR, Smith BD, Lee KM, Griffiths SW (1997) The ecological basis of freshwater pond management for biodiversity. Aquat Conserv 7:91–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall DL, Willig MR, Moorhead DL, Sites RW, Fish EB, Mollhagen TR (2004) Aquatic macroinvertebrate diversity of Playa wetlands: the role of the landscape and Ireland biogeographic characteristics. Wetlands 24:77–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helgen J (2002) Methods for evaluating wetland condition: developing an Invertebrate Index of Biological Integrity for wetlands. EPA-822-R-02-019. Office of Water, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Hines JE (1996) SPECRICH Software to compute species abundance from empirical species abundance distribution data. USGS-PWRC. http://www.mbr-pwrc.usgs.gov/software/specrich.html

  • Johnson PN, Gerbeaux P (2004) Wetland types in New Zealand. Coordinated monitoring of New Zealands wetlands. Department of Conservation/Ministry of the Environment, Wellington

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly MG, Whitton BA (1995) The Trophic Diatom Index: a new index for monitoring eutrophication in rivers. J Appl Phycol 7:433–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilroy C, Biggs BJF, Vyverman W (2007) Rules for macro-organisms applied to micro-organisms: patterns of endemism in benthic freshwater diatoms. Oikos 116:550–564

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krammer K, Lange-Bertalot H (1991–1997) Süsswasserflora von Mitteleuropa. 2 Bacillariophyceae. Teil 1–4. Fischer, Stuttgart

  • Lane CR, Brown MT (2007) Diatoms as indicators of isolated wetland condition in Florida, USA. Ecol Indic 7:521–540

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larned ST, Scarsbrook MR, Snelder TH, Biggs BJF (2004) Water quality in low-elevation streams and rivers of New Zealand: recent state and trends in contrasting land-cover classes. N Z J Mar Freshw Res 38:347–366

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lillie RA (1991) The adult aquatic and semiaquatic Coleoptera of nine northwestern Wisconsin wetlands. Coleopt Bull 45:101–111

    Google Scholar 

  • Lougheed VA, McIntosh MD, Parker CA, Stevenson RJ (2008) Wetland degradation leads to homogenization of the biota at local and landscape scales. Freshw Biol 53:2402–2413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundin L, Bergquist B (1990) Effects on water chemistry after drainage of a bog for forestry. Hydrobiologia 196:167–181

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mack JJ (2007) Developing a wetland IBI with statewide application after multiple testing iterations. Ecol Indic 7:864–881

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McCune B, Mefford MJ (1997) PC-ORD. Multivariate analysis of ecological data. MjM Software Design, Gleneden Beach, OR

    Google Scholar 

  • McGlone MS (2009) Postglacial history of New Zealand wetlands and implications for their conservation. N Z J Ecol 33:1–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitsch WJ, Gosselink JG (2000) Wetlands, 3rd edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Mundry R, Nunn CL (2009) Stepwise model fitting and statistical inference: turning noise into signal pollution. Am Nat 173:119–123

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nicolet P, Biggs J, Fox G, Hodson MJ, Reynolds C, Whitfield M, Williams P (2004) The wetland plants and macro invertebrate assemblages of temporary ponds in England and Wales. Biol Conserv 120:261–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Odum EP, Finn JT, Franz EH (1979) Perturbation theory and the subsidy-stress gradient. Bioscience 29:349–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oertli B, Joye DA, Castella E, Juge R, Cambin D, Lachavanne J-B (2002) Does size matter? The relationship between pond area and biodiversity. Biol Conserv 104:59–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson EJ, Engstrom ES, Doeringsfeld MR, Bellig R (1995) Abundance and distribution of macroinvertebrates in relation to macrophyte communities in a prairie marsh, Swan Lake, Minnesota. J Freshw Ecol 10:325–335

    Google Scholar 

  • Pither J, Aarssen LW (2005) The evolutionary species pool hypothesis and patterns of freshwater diatom diversity along a pH gradient. J Biogeogr 32:503–513

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plafkin JL, Barbour MT, Porter KD, Gross SK, Hughes RM (1989) Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in streams and rivers: benthic macroinvertebrates and fish. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Reddy PM (2007) Algae as ecological indicators in assessing the river water quality. Pollut Res 26:33–37

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Resh VH, Jackson JK (1993) Rapid assessment approaches to biomonitoring using benthic macroinvertebrates. In: Rosenberg DM, Resh VH (eds) Freshwater biomonitoring and benthic macroinvertebrates. Chapman and Hall, New York, pp 195–233

    Google Scholar 

  • Resource Management Act (1991) New Zealand Government, Wellington

  • Robson BJ, Clay CJ (2005) Local and regional macroinvertebrate diversity in the wetlands of a cleared agricultural landscape in south-western Victoria, Australia. Aquat Conserv 15:403–414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma RC, Rawat JS (2009) Monitoring of aquatic invertebrates as bioindicators for assessing the health of wetlands: a case study in the Central Himalayas, India. Ecol Indic 9:118–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SPSS (2000) Systat, version 10. SPSS, Chicago, IL

    Google Scholar 

  • Stark JD, Maxted JR (2007) A biotic index for New Zealand’s soft bottom streams. N Z J Mar Freshw Res 41:43–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suren AM, Lambert P (2010) Temporal variation of invertebrate communities in perennial wetlands. N Z J Mar Freshw Res 44:1–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suren AM, Lambert P, Image KL, Sorrell BK (2007) Variation in wetland invertebrate communities in lowland acidic fens and swamps. Freshw Biol 53:727–744

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tangen BA, Butler MG, Ell MJ (2003) Weak correspondence between macroinvertebrates and assemblages and land use in Prairie Pothole region in wetlands, USA. Wetlands 23:104–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weilhofer CL, Pan Y (2007) Relationships between diatoms and environmental variables in wetlands in the Willamete Valley, Oregon, USA. Wetlands 27:668–682

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler BD, Proctor MCF (2000) Ecological gradients, subdivisions and terminology of north-west European mires. J Ecol 88:187–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winterbourn MJ, Gregson KLD, Dolphin CH (2006) Guide to the aquatic insects of New Zealand. Bull Entomol Soc N Z 14:1–108

    Google Scholar 

  • Wissinger SA, Greig H, McIntosh A (2009) Absence of species replacements between permanent and temporary lentic communities in New Zealand. J N Am Benthol Soc 28:12–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was funded by the New Zealand Foundation for Research, Science and Technology, Contract Number C09X0508 (Maintaining and Restoring Wetlands), and the Department of Conservation Contract Number 3912 (Biodiversity of Lowland Coastal Wetlands). We thank the Department of Conservation and various land owners in the region for site access. Kerry Bodmin (NIWA Hamilton) and JoAnna Lessard (NIWA Christchurch) are also thanked for review comments.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Brian Sorrell

    Present address: Department of Biological Sciences, University of Aarhus, Ole Worms Allé, Building 1135, 8000, Århus C, Denmark

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Limited, P.O. Box 8602, Christchurch, New Zealand

    Alastair Suren, Cathy Kilroy, Janine Wech & Brian Sorrell

  2. National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Limited, 28 Johnston Street, Greymouth, New Zealand

    Paul Lambert

Authors
  1. Alastair Suren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cathy Kilroy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Paul Lambert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Janine Wech
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Brian Sorrell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alastair Suren.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Suren, A., Kilroy, C., Lambert, P. et al. Are landscape-based wetland condition indices reflected by invertebrate and diatom communities?. Wetlands Ecol Manage 19, 73–88 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-010-9201-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-010-9201-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation