Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Influence of Sieve Mesh Size on Relationships between Macroinvertebrate Assemblage and Environmental Variables in Wetlands

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Wetlands Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Macroinvertebrates are often excluded from wetland monitoring because samples collected using a conventional 500-μm mesh sieve are time consuming to process. To facilitate increased cost-effectiveness of obtaining macroinvertebrate data, influence of sieve mesh size on relationships between macroinvertebrate and environmental variables was evaluated in 27 prairie pothole wetlands. Benthic and water-column samples were washed through sieves with mesh sizes of 6 mm, 4 mm, 2 mm, and 500 μm, and macroinvertebrate numerical densities and taxon richness were quantified. Influence of particulate matter was evaluated by washing invertebrates through sieves before and after removal of this material from samples, and calculating differences in density and taxon richness. Regardless of sieve mesh size and particulate matter abundance, macroinvertebrate taxon richness exclusive of taxa occurring in all wetlands (planorbid snails, oligochaetes, leeches, chironomids) was positively correlated with plant cover, and negatively correlated with turbidity and fish biomass (p ≤ 0.05).Use of a 6-mm mesh sieve reduced sample volume by 35% and processing time by 54% relative to the 500-μm mesh sieve. Results suggest that reliance on taxon richness metrics and a sieve with 6-mm mesh will reduce macroinvertebrate sampling costs while still generating data that reflect wetland condition.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

References

  • Aarnio K, Mattila J, Tornroos A, Bonsdorff E (2011) Zoobenthos as an environmental quality element: the ecological significance of sampling design and functional traits. Marine Ecology 32:58–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • APHA (2005) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. American Public Health Association, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey RC, Norris RH, Reynoldson TB (2001) Taxononomic resolution of benthic macroinvertebrate communities in bioassessments. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 20:280–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin RC (2016) Evaluating alternative macroinvertebrate sampling methodologies in wetlands: influence of sieve mesh size on relationships between environmental and assemblage variables. M.Sc. Thesis, Iowa State University

  • Barba B, Larranaga A, Otermin A, Basaguren A, Pozo J (2010) The effect of sieve mesh size on the description of macroinvertebrate communities. Limnetica 29:211–220

    Google Scholar 

  • Batzer DP (2013) The seemingly intractable ecological responses of invertebrates in north American wetlands: a review. Wetlands 33:1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouchard RW, Genet JA, Chirhart JW (2014) Does supplementing dipnet samples with activity traps improve the ability to assess the biological integrity of macroinvertebrate communities in depressional wetlands. Wetlands 34:699–711

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheal F, Davis JA, Growns JE, Bradley JS, Whittles FH (1993) The influence of sampling method on the classification of wetland macroinvertebrate communities. Hydrobiologia 257:47–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen J, Cohen P, West SG, Aiken LS (2003) Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah

    Google Scholar 

  • Couto T, Patricio J, Neto JM, Ceia FR, Franco J, Marques JC (2010) The influence of mesh size in environmental quality assessment of estuarine macrobenthic communities. Ecological Indicators 10:1162–1173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowardin LM, Carter V, Golet FC, LaRoe ET (1979) Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. FWS/OBS-79/31

  • Euliss NH, Wrubleski DA, Mushet DM (1999) Wetlands of the prairie pothole region: invertebrate species composition, ecology, and management. In: Batzer DP, Rader RB, Wissinger SA (eds) Invertebrates in freshwater wetlands of North America: ecology and management. Wiley, New York, pp 471–514

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferraro SP, Cole FA (2004) Optimal benthic macrofaunal sampling protocol for detecting differences among four habitats in Willapa Bay, Washington, USA. Estuaries 27:1014–1025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferraro SP, Cole FA, Olsen AR (2006) A more cost-effective EMAP benthic macrofaunal sampling protocol. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 116:275–290

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Foth JR, Straub JN, Kaminski RM (2012) Comparison of methods for processing sweep-net samples of aquatic invertebrates from forested wetlands. Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management 3:296–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gleason RA, Euliss NH, Hubbard DE, Duffy WG (2003) Effects of sediment load on emergence of aquatic invertebrates and plants from wetland soil egg and seed banks. Wetlands 23:26–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldsmith FB, Harrison CM (1976) Description and analysis of vegetation. In: Chapman SB (ed) Methods in plant ecology. Blackwell, London, pp 85–156

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruenert U, Carr G, Morin A (2007) Reducing the cost of benthic sample processing by using sieve retention probability models. Hydrobiologia 589:79–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammerstrom KK, Ranasinghe JA, Weisberg SB, Oliver JS, Fairey WR, Slattery PN, Oakden JM (2010) Effect of sample area and sieve size on benthic macrofaunal community condition assessments in California enclosed bays and estuaries. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management 8:649–658

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hentges VA, Stewart TW (2010) Macroinvertebrate assemblages in Iowa prairie pothole wetlands and relation to environmental features. Wetlands 30:501–511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson PTJ, Hoverman JT, McKenzie VJ, Blaustein AR, Richgels KLD (2013) Urbanization and wetland communities: applying metacommunity theory to understand the local and landscape effects. Journal of Applied Ecology 50:34–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King RS, Richardson CJ (2002) Evaluating subsampling approaches and macroinvertebrate taxonomic resolution for wetland bioassessment. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 21:150–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lampadariou N, Karakassis I, Pearson TH (2005) Cost/benefit analysis of a benthic monitoring programme of organic enrichment using different sampling and analysis methods. Marine Pollution Bulletin 50:1606–1618

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • MacDade LS, Rodewald PG, Hatch KA (2011) Contribution of emergent aquatic insects to refueling in spring migrant songbirds. Auk 128:127–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maurer KM, Stewart TW, Lorenz FO (2014) Direct and indirect effects of fish on invertebrates and tiger salamanders in prairie pothole wetlands. Wetlands 34:735–745

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCune B, Grace JB (2002) Analysis of ecological communities. MJM Software Design, Gleneden Beach

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer CK, Peterson SD, Whiles MR (2011) Quantitative assessment of yield, precision, and cost-effectiveness of three wetland invertebrate sampling techniques. Wetlands 31:101–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer MD, Davis CA, Bidwell JR (2013) Assessment of two methods for sampling invertebrates in shallow vegetated wetlands. Wetlands 33:1063–1073

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer MD, Davis CA, Dvorett D (2015) Response of wetland invertebrate communities to local and landscape factors in north Central Oklahoma. Wetlands 35:533–546

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MJM Software (2006) PC-ORD. Multivariate analysis of ecological data, version 5. Gleneden Beach

  • Morin A, Stephenson J, Strike J, Solimini AG (2004) Sieve retention probabilities of stream benthic invertebrates. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 23:383–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potthoff AJ, Herwig BR, Hanson MA, Zimmer KD, Butler MG, Reed JR, Parsons BG, Ward MC (2008) Cascading food-web effects of piscivorous introductions to shallow lakes. Journal of Applied Ecology 45:1170–1179

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinna M, Marini G, Mancinelli G, Basset A (2014) Influence of sampling effort on ecological descriptors and indicators in perturbed and unperturbed conditions: a study case using benthic macroinvertebrates in Mediterranean transitional waters. Ecological Indicators 37:27–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinna M, Marini G, Rosati I, Neto JM, Patricio J, Marques JC, Basset A (2013) The usefulness of large body-size macroinvertebrates in the rapid ecological assessment of Mediterranean lagoons. Ecological Indicators 29:48–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riens JR, Schwarz MS, Mustafa F, Hoback WW (2013) Aquatic macroinvertebrate communities and water quality at buffered and non-buffered wetland sites on Federal Waterfowl Production Areas in the Rainwater Basin, Nebraska. Wetlands 33:1025–1036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson CJ, Vymazal J (2001) Sampling macrophytes in wetlands. In: Rader RB, Batzer DP, Wissinger SA (eds) Bio assessment and management of north American freshwater wetlands. Wiley, New York, pp 297–337

    Google Scholar 

  • SAS Institute (2013) SAS 9.4. Cary

  • Sundberg MD, Baldwin RC, Stewart TW, Weber MW (2016) Linkages between land use, invasive fishes, and prairie pothole wetland condition. Wetlands 36:1097–1107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tapp JL, Webb EB (2015) Aquatic invertebrate food base for waterbirds at wetland reserve program easements in the lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley. Wetlands 35:183–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson BW, Riddle MJ, Stark JS (2003) Cost-efficient methods for marine pollution monitoring at Casey Station, East Antarctica: the choice of sieve mesh-size and taxonomic resolution. Marine Pollution Bulletin 46:232–243

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Turner AM, Trexler JC (1997) Sampling aquatic invertebrates from marshes: evaluating the options. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 16:694–709

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USEPA (2002) Methods for evaluating wetland condition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. EPA 822-R-02-016

  • USEPA (2011) National wetland condition assessment field operations manual. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. EPA-843-R-10-001

  • van der Valk AG, Davis CB (1978) The role of seed banks in the vegetation dynamics of prairie glacial marshes. Ecology 59:322–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmer KD, Herwig BR, Laurich LM (2006) Nutrient excretion by fish in wetland ecosystems and its potential to support algal production. Limnology and Oceanography 51:197–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank R. Bruner, V. Evelsizer, B. Harland, M. Skopec (Iowa Department of Natural Resources), C. Edwards (Hancock County Conservation Board), J. Hanson (Worth County Conservation Board), R. Schwartz (Winnebago County Conservation Board), M. Webb (Cerro Gordo County Conservation Board), and several private landowners for providing technical assistance, site access, and field housing. K. Cox, K. Edmonds, D. Gooder, J. Hurd, M. McKinney, and O. Rauen (Iowa State University) assisted with data collection, and G. Courtney (Iowa State University) assisted with invertebrate identification. Research described here was funded by USEPA (assistance agreement 97744301), although this manuscript was not subjected to USEPA product and administrative review and therefore might not reflect views of the Agency.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Ryan C. Baldwin

    Present address: Amec Foster Wheeler Environment and Infrastructure, 15933 Clayton Road Suite 215, Ballwin, MO, 63011, USA

  2. Michael D. Sundberg

    Present address: Arkansas Game and Fish Commission, 771 Jordan Drive, Monticello, AR, 71655, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, Iowa State University, 339 Science Hall II, Ames, IA, 50011, USA

    Ryan C. Baldwin, Michael D. Sundberg, Timothy W. Stewart & Michael J. Weber

Authors
  1. Ryan C. Baldwin
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael D. Sundberg
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Timothy W. Stewart
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michael J. Weber
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Timothy W. Stewart.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 3 Mean densities (and percent occurrence) of invertebrate taxa in 27 Iowa prairie pothole wetlands
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Baldwin, R.C., Sundberg, M.D., Stewart, T.W. et al. Influence of Sieve Mesh Size on Relationships between Macroinvertebrate Assemblage and Environmental Variables in Wetlands. Wetlands 38, 677–687 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-018-1010-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-018-1010-0

Keywords