Possible sampling simplification of macroinvertebrates for urban drainage purposes

  • Gabriela Stastna
  • David Stransky
  • Ivana Kabelkova
Conference paper
Part of the Alliance for Global Sustainability Bookseries book series (AGSB, volume 19)

Abstract

Admissible simplification of field sampling of macroinvertebrates compared to the standard AQEM method was searched for. Both the effect of the subjectivity of multihabitat sampling and the effect of the reduction of the number of sampling points and their uncertainties were studied. A substantial reduction of the number of sampling units (from 20 to 7) is possible only for ASPT and Saprobic index and diversity (to 9). A certain reduction (to 14) is also possible for the number of individuals, % EPT and IBI index but no reduction can be applied in case of number of taxa and BMWP, where already the replicate 20 unit samples were biased by an unacceptable uncertainty.

Keywords

Sampling Unit Probability Density Function Urban Drainage Combine Sewer Overflow Saprobic Index 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    AQEM consorcium (2002) AQEM – Manual for the Application of the AQEM System, Project under the 5th Framework Programme Energy The Development and Testing of an Integrated Assessment System for the Ecological Quality of Streams and Rivers throughout Europe using Benthic Macroinvertebrates; 1st deliverable, due to 31/8/00, entitled: Stream assessment methods, stream typology approaches and outlines of a European stream typology,Contract No: EVK1-CT1999-00027.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vlek H.E. (2004) Comparison of (Cost) Effectiveness between Various Macroinvertebrate Field and Laboratory Protocols. European Commission, Star, Deliverable N1, 78 pp.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vlek H.E., Šporka F., Krno I. (2006) Influence of macroinvertebrate sample size on bioassessment of stress. Hydrobiologia 566, 523–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lorenz A., Kirhner L. and Hering D. (2004) Electronic subsampling of macrobenthic samples: how many individuals are needed for a valid assessment result? Hydrobiologia 516, 299–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wright J.F. et al. (1984) A Preliminary classification of running water sites in Great Britain based on macroinvertebrate species and the prediction of community type using environmental data. Freshwat. Biol. 14, 221–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kokeš J., Zahrádková S., Němejcová D., Hodovský J., Jarkovský J., Soldán T. (2006) The PERLA system in the Czech Republic: a multivariate approach for assessing the ecological status of running waters, Hydrobiologia 566, 343–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Plafkin J.L., Barbour M.T., Porter K.D., Gross S.K., Hughes R.M. (1989) Rapid bioasessment protocols for use in stress and rivers: benthic macroinvertebrates and fis. EPA/444/4-89-001. United states environmental protection agency, Washington D.C., USA.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Metzeling L., Miller J. (2001) Evaluation of the sample size used for the rapid bioassessment of rivers using macroinvertebrates, Hydrobiologia 444, 159–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Clarke R. T., Lorenz A., Sandin L., Schmidt-Kloiber A., Strackbein J., Kneebone N.T., Haase P. (2006) Effects of sampling and sub-sampling variation usány the STAR-AQEM sampling protocol no the precision of mavroinvertebrate metrics, Hydrobiologie 566, 441–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lorenz A., Clarke R.T. (2006) Sample coherence – a filed study approach to assess similarity of macroinvertebrate samples. Hydrobiologia 566, 461–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    BUWAL (1998). Methoden zur Untersuchung und Beurteilung der Fliessgewasser: Ökomorphologie Stufe F, Mitteilungen zum Gewässerschutz Nr. 27.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    14.University of Washington (2000) Benthic Index of Biological Integrity (B-IBI) for the Puget Sound Lowlands, Internet source: http://www.cbr.washington.edu/salmonweb/bibi/.
  15. 15.
    BWK-Materialien (2003) Begleitband zu dem BWK-Merkblatt.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gabriela Stastna
    • 1
  • David Stransky
    • 1
  • Ivana Kabelkova
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Sanitary and Ecological EngineeringCzech Technical University in PraguePrague 6Czech Republic

Personalised recommendations