Abstract
A number of biological approaches are commonly used to assess the ecological integrity of stream ecosystems. Recently, it is becoming increasingly common to use multiple organism groups in bioassessment. Advocates of the multiple organism approach argue that the use of different organism groups should strengthen inference-based models and ultimately result in lower assessment error, while opponents argue that organism groups often respond similarly to stress implying a high degree of redundancy. Using fish, macroinvertebrate, macrophyte and benthic diatom data, site-specific parameters (e.g., water chemistry and substratum) and catchment variables from European mountain (n = 77) and lowland (n = 85) streams we evaluated the discriminatory power and uncertainty associated with the use of a number of biological metrics commonly used in stream assessment. The primary environmental gradient for both streams types was land use and nutrient enrichment. Secondary and tertiary gradients were related to habitat quality or alterations in hydromorphology. Benthic diatom and macroinvertebrate metrics showed high discriminatory power (R 2 values often >0.50) and low error (<30%) with the primary (nutrient) gradient, while both fish and macrophyte metrics performed relatively poorly. Conversely, both fish and macrophyte metrics showed higher response (high coefficients of determination) than either benthic diatom or macroinvertebrate metrics to the second (e.g., alteration in habitat/hydromorphology) gradient. However, the discriminatory power and error associated with individual metrics varied markedly, indicating that caution should be exercised when selecting the ‘best’ organism group or metric to monitor stress.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Allan, J. D., 1995. Stream Ecology. Structure and Function Of Running Waters. Chapman and Hall, London.
Armitage, P. D., D. Moss, J. F. Wright & M. T. Furse, 1983. The performance of a new biological water quality score system based on macroinvertebrates over a wide range of unpolluted running-water sites. Water Research 17: 333–347.
Bain, M. B., J. T. Finn & H. E. Booke, 1988. Streamflow regulation and fish community structure. Ecology 69: 382–392.
Battarbee, R. W., R. J. Flower, S. Juggins, S. T. Patrick & A. C. Stevenson, 1997. The relationship between diatoms and surface water quality in the Hoylandet area of Nord-Trondelag, Norway. Hydrobiologia 348: 69–80.
Buffagni, A., 1997. Mayfly community composition and the biological quality of streams. In Landolt, P. & M. Sartori (eds), Ephemeroptera & Plecoptera: Biology-Ecology-Systematics. MTL, Fribourg, 235–246.
Buffagni, A., 1999. Pregio naturalistico, qualità ecologica e integrità della comunità degli Efemerotteri. Un indice per la classificazione dei fiumi italiani. Acqua & Aria 8: 99–107.
Buffagni, A., S. Erba, M. Cazzola & J. L. Kemp, 2004. The AQEM multimetric system for the southern Italian Apennines: assessing the impact of water quality and habitat degradation on pool macroinvertebrates in Mediterranean rivers. Hydrobiologia 516: 313–329.
CEMAGREF, 1982. Etude des méthodes biologiques d’appréciation quantitative de la qualitédes eaux. Rapport Q. E. Lyon A. F. Bassin Rhône-Méditérannée-Corse, 218 pp.
Coring, E., 1999. Situation and developments of algal (diatom)-based techniques for monitoring rivers in Germany. In Prygiel, J., B. A. Whitton & J. Bukowska (eds), Use of Algae for Monitoring Rivers III. Agence de l’Eau Artois-Picardie, Douai, 122–127.
Dell’Uomo, A., 1996. Assessment of water quality of an Apennine river as a pilot study for diatom-based monitoring of Italian watercourses. In Whtitton, B. A. & E. Rott (eds), Use of Algae for Monitoring Rivers II, Institut für Botanik, Universität Innsbruck, 65–72.
Descy, J. P. & M. Coste, 1990. Utilisation des diatomées benthiques pour l’évaluation de la qualitédes eaux courantes. Rapport final, UNECED, Namur, Cemagref, Bordeaux.
Ellenberg, H., H. E. Weber, R. Düll, V. Wirth, W. Werner & D. Paulißen, 1992. Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa. Scripta Geobotanica 18: 1–257.
Englund, G., 1997. Importance of spatial scale and prey movements in predator caging experiments. Ecology 78: 2316–2325.
European Commission, 2000. Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council — Establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy. Brussels, Belgium, 23 October 2000.
Fore, L.S., J. R. Karr & R. W. Wisseman, 1996. Assessing invertebrate responses to human activities: evaluating alternative approaches. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 15: 212–231.
Furse, M. T., A. Schmidt-Kloiber, J. Strackbein, J. Davy-Bowker, A. Lorenz, J. van der Molen & P. Scarlett, 2004. Results of the sampling programme. A report to the European Commission. Framework V Project STAR (EVK1-CT-2001_00089).
Gorman, O. T. & J. R. Karr, 1978. Habitat structure and stream fish communities. Ecology 59: 507–515.
Haury, J., M. C. Peltre, M. Tremolieres, J. Barbe, G. Thiebaut, I. Berne, H. Daniel, P. Chatenet, S. Muller, A. Dutartre, C. Laplace-Treyture, A. Cazaubon & E. Lambert-Servien, 2002. A method involving macrophytes to assess water trophy and organic pollution: the Macrophyte Biological Index for Rivers (IBMR) — application to different types of rivers and pollutions. In Dutartre, A. & M. H. Montel (eds), Proceedings 11th EWRS Internat. Symp. Aquatic Weeds. Moliets Et Maa, France, 247–250.
Hering, D., C. Meier, C. Rawer-Jost, C. K. Feld, R. Biss, A. Zenker, A. Sundermann, S. Lohse & J. Böhmer, 2004. Assessing streams in Germany with benthic invertebrates: selection of candidate metrics. Limnologica 34: 398–415.
Hering, D. & J. Strackbein, 2002. STAR stream types and sampling sites. A report to the European Commission. Framework V Project STAR (EVK1-CT-2001_00089).
Hildrew, A. G., G. Woodward, J. H. Winterbottom & S. Orton, 2004. Strong density dependence in a predatory insect: largescale experiments in a stream. Journal of Animal Ecology 73: 447–458.
Hirst, H., I. Jüttern & S. J. Ormerod, 2002. Comparing the responses of diatoms and macroinvertebrates to metals in upland streams of Wales and Cornwall. Freshwater Biology 47: 1752–1765.
Hoffmann, G., 1999. Trophiebewertung von Seen anhand von Aufwuchsdiatomeen. Von Tümpling, W. & G. Friedrich (eds), Biologische Gewässeruntersuchung, 2. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena: 319–333.
Holmes, N. T. H., J. R. Newman, S. Chadd, K. J. Rouen, L. Saint & F. H. Dawson, 1999. Mean Trophic Rank: A users manual. R&D Technical Report No. E 38, Environment Agency, Bristol, UK.
Johnson, R. K., 1998. Spatio-temporal variability of temperate lake macroinvertebrate communities: detection of impact. Ecological Applications 8: 61–70.
Johnson, R. K., T. Wiederholm & D. M. Rosenberg, 1993. Freshwater biomonitoring using individual organisms, populations and species assemblages of benthic macroinvertebrates. In Rosenberg, D. M. & V. H. Resh (eds), Freshwater Biomonitoring and Benthic Macroinvertebrates. Chapman and Hall, New York, 40–158.
Johnson, R. K., W. Goedkoop & L. Sandin, 2004. Spatial scale and ecological relationships between the macroinvertebrate communities of stony habitats of streams and lakes. Freshwater Biology 49: 1179–1194.
Knoben, R. A. E., C. Roos & M. C. M. van Oirschot, 1995. Biological Assessment Methods for Watercourses. UN/ECE Task Force on Monitoring and Assessment, Lelystad.
Kohler, S. L. & M. J. Wiley, 1997. Pathogen outbreaks reveal large-scale effects of competition in stream communities. Ecology 73: 2164–2176.
Kolkwitz, R. & M. Marsson, 1902. Grundsätse für die biologiche Beurteiling des Wassers nach seiner Flora und Fauna. Mitt. Prüfungsanst. Wasserversorg. Abwasserreinig 1: 33–72.
Lake, P. S., 2000. Disturbance, patchiness, and diversity in streams. Journal of North American Benthological Society 19: 573–592.
LeCointe, C., M. Coste & J. Prygiel, 1993. “OMNIDIA” software for taxonomy, calculation of diatom indices and inventories management. Hydrobiologia 269/270: 509–513.
Lorenz, A., D. Hering, C. K. Feld & P. Rolauffs, 2004. A new method for assessing the impact of morphological degradation on the benthic invertebrate fauna for streams in Germany. Hydrobiologia 516: 107–127.
McNaughton, S. J., 1967. Relationships among functional properties of Californian grasslands. Nature 216: 168–169.
Metcalfe, J. L., 1989. Biological water-quality assessment of running waters based on macroinvertebrate communities — history and present status in Europe. Environmental Pollution 60: 101–139.
Noble, R. & I. Cowx, 2002. Development of a river-type classification system (D1); Compilation and harmonization of fish species classification (D2). Report of the EU funded project Development, Evaluation & Implementation of a Standardised Fish-based Assessment Method for the Ecological Status of European Rivers — A Contribution to the Water Framework Directive (FAME). Available from http://fame.-boku.ac.at/downloads/D1_2_typology_and%20species_classification.pdf.
Ormerod, S. J., S. D. Rundle, E. C. Lloyd & A. A. Douglas, 1993. The influence of riparian management on the habitat structure and macroinvertebrate communities of upland streams draining plantation forests. Journal of Applied Ecology 30: 13–24.
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.
Raven P. J., N. T. H. Holmes, F. H. Dawson, P. J. A. Fox, M. Everard, I. R. Fozzard & K. J. Rouen, 1998. River Habitat Quality — the physical character of rivers and streams in the UK and Isle of Man. River Habitat Survey Report Number 2, Bristol: Environment Agency, Stirling: Scottish Environment Protection Agency. Belfast: Environment and Heritage Service, 84.
Resh, V. H., A. V. Brown, A. P. Covich, M. E. Gurtz, H. W. Li, G. W. Minshall, S. R. Reice, A. L. Sheldon, J. B. Wallace & R. C. Wissmar, 1988. The role of disturbance in stream ecology. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 7: 433–455.
Reynoldson, T. B., R. H. Norris, V. H. Resh, K. E. Day & D. M. Rosenberg, 1997. The reference condition: a comparison of multimetric and multivariate approaches to assess water-quality impairment using benthic macroinvertebrates. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 16: 833–852.
Richards, C., R. J. Haro, L. B. Johnson & G. E. Host, 1997. Catchment and reach-scale properties as indicators of macroinvertebrate species traits. Freshwater Biology 37: 219–230.
Rott, E., G. Hofmann, K. Pall, P. Pfister & E. Pipp, 1997. Indikationslisten für Aufwuchsalgen. Teil 1: Saprobielle Indikation. Bundesministerium für Land-und Forstwirtschaft, Wien, 73 pp.
Rott, E., P. Pfister, H. van Dam, E. Pipp, K. Pall, N. Binder & K. Ortler, 1999. Indikationslisten für Aufwuchsalgen. Teil 2: Trophieindikation sowie geochemische Präferenz, taxonomische und toxikologische Anmerkungen. Bundesministerium für Land-und Forstwirtschaft, Wien, 248 pp.
Rumeau, A. & M. Coste, 1988. Initiation á la systématique des diatomées d’eau douce pour l’utilisation pratique d’un indice diatomique générique. Bulletin Francais de la Peche et de la Pisciculture 309: 1–69.
Sandin, L. & R. K. Johnson, 2000. Statistical power of selected indicator metrics using macroinvertebrates for assessing acidification and eutrophication of running waters. Hydrobiologia 422/423: 233–243.
Sandin, L., J. Dahl & R. K. Johnson, 2004. Assessing acid stress in Swedish boreal and alpine streams using benthic macroinvertebrates. Hydrobiologia 516: 129–148.
SAS, 1994. JMP — Statistics Made Visual, Version 3.1. SAS Institute Inc, Cary, North Carolina, USA.
Southwood, T. B. E., 1977. Habitat, the template for ecological strategies?. Journal of Animal Ecology 46: 336–365.
Schaumburg, J., C. Schranz, J. Foerster, A Gutowski, G. Hofmann, P. Meilinger, S. Schneider & U. Schmedtje, 2004. Ecological classification of macrophytes and phytobenthos for rivers in Germany according to the Water Framework Directive. Limnologica 34: 283–301.
Shannon, C. E. & W. Weaver, 1949. The Mathematical Theory of Communication. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.
Skriver, J., N. Friberg & J. Kirkegaard, 2001. Biological assessment of running waters in Denmark: Introduction of the Danish Stream Fauna Index (DSFI). Verhandlungen der internationalen Vereineinigung für theoretische und angewandte Limnologie 27: 1822–1830.
Steinberg, C. & S. Schiefele, 1988. Biological indication of trophy and pollution of running waters. Zeitschrift für Wasser-und Abwasser-Forschung 21: 227–234.
Tremp, H. & A. Kohler, 1995. The usefulness of macrophyte monitoring-systems, exemplified on eutrophication and acidification of running waters. Acta Botanica Gallica 142: 541–550.
Wiley, M. J., S. L. Kohler & P. W. Seelbach, 1997. Reconciling landscape and local views of aquatic communities: lessons from Michigan trout streams. Freshwater Biology 37: 133–148.
Zelinka, M. & P. Marvan, 1961. Zur Präzisierung der biologischen Klassifikation der Reinheit fließender Gewässer. Archiv für Hydrobiologie 57: 389–407.
Ziemann, H., 1999. Bestimmung des Halobienindex. Tümpling W. & G. Friedrich (eds), Biologische Gewässeruntersuchung. Methoden der Biologischen Gewässeruntersuchung, 2: 310–313.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Springer
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Johnson, R.K., Hering, D., Furse, M.T., Clarke, R.T. (2006). Detection of ecological change using multiple organism groups: metrics and uncertainty. In: Furse, M.T., Hering, D., Brabec, K., Buffagni, A., Sandin, L., Verdonschot, P.F.M. (eds) The Ecological Status of European Rivers: Evaluation and Intercalibration of Assessment Methods. Developments in Hydrobiology, vol 188. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5493-8_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5493-8_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-5160-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-5493-8
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)