Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Use of ecosystem health indicators for assessing anthropogenic impacts on freshwaters in Argentina: a review

  • Published:
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Indicators of ecosystem health are effective tools to assess freshwater ecosystem impairment. However, they are scarcely used as a monitoring tool by local environmental agencies in Argentina. Here, we review the literature to analyze the use of ecosystem health indicators in freshwaters from Argentina. We found 91 scientific articles relating to the use of ecological indices to assess the impact of different environmental stressors in aquatic environments published between 1996 and 2019. We generated Google Earth map where we deployed the sampling sites and type of indices reported by each article. As biological indices were the most used, we also surveyed bioindication experts to gather information on their application. We found that most studies were concentrated mainly in Pampas (34%), Dry Chaco (20%), Espinal (12%), and Patagonian Steppe (10%) ecoregions. Biological indices (mainly with invertebrates) were more used than geomorphological or physico-chemical indices. Indices resulted useful to evaluate the impact of stressors in 63% of cases, being land use the most studied stressor. However, sampling design varied greatly among studies, making their comparison difficult. The information compiled here could help to the design of monitoring protocols, the adoption of regional indices, and the creation of a national inventory of ecosystem health status, which are mandatory to propose well-grounded conservation and management policies for freshwaters in Argentina.

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
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agència Catalana de l’Aigua. (2006a). http://aca.gencat.cat/web/.content/20_Aigua/05_seguiment_i_control/01_protocols/03_Protocol_rius.pdf. Accessed 12 March 2019.

  • Agència Catalana de l’Aigua. (2006b). http://aca.gencat.cat/web/.content/20_Aigua/05_seguiment_i_control/01_protocols/12_hidri.pdf. Accessed 12 March 2019.

  • Alba-Tercedor, J., & Sánchez-Ortega, A. (1988). Un método rápido y simple para evaluar la calidad biológica de las aguas corrientes basado en el de Hellawell (1978). Limnetica, 4, 51–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allan, J. D. (2004). Landscapes and riverscapes: the influence of land use on stream ecosystems. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.35.120202.110122.

  • Berón, L. (1984). Evaluación de la Calidad de las Aguas de los ríos de La Plata y Matanza-Riachuelo, mediante la utilización de índices de calidad de agua. Argentina: Secretaría de Vivienda y ordenamiento Ambiental, Ministerio de Salud y Acción Social.

  • Brailovsky, A. E., & Foguelman, D. (1991). Memoria Verde: Historia Ecológica de la Argentina. Buenos Aires: Ed. Sudamericana.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brasil, L. S., Luiza-Andrade, A., Batista-Calvão, L., Dias-Silva, K., Justino-Faria, A. P., Shimano, J., et al. (2020). Aquatic insects and their environmental predictors: a scientometric study focused on environmental monitoring in lotic environmental. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-020-8147-z.

  • Burger, J. (2006). Bioindicators: types, development, and use in ecological assessment and research. Environmental Bioindicators. https://doi.org/10.1080/15555270590966483.

  • Burkart, R., Bárbaro, N. O., Sánchez, R. O. & Gómez, D. A. (1999). Ecoregiones de la Argentina. Administración de Parques Nacionales. http://www.sib.gov.ar/archivos/Eco-Regiones_de_la_Argentina.pdf. Accessed 26 December 2019.

  • Campbell, D. E. (2000). Using energy systems theory to define, measure, and interpret ecological integrity and ecosystem health. Ecosystem Health. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1526-0992.2000.006003181.x.

  • Chi, S., Li, S., Chen, S., Chen, M., Zheng, J., & Hu, J. (2017). Temporal variations in macroinvertebrate communities from the tributaries in the Three Gorges Reservoir Catchment, China. Revista Chilena de Historia Natural. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40693-017-0069-y.

  • Derocles, S. A. P., Bohan, D. A., Dumbrell, A. J., Kitson, J. J. N., Massol, F., Pauvert, C., et al. (2018). Biomonitoring for the 21st century: integrating next-generation sequencing into ecological network analysis. Advances in Ecological Research, 58, 1–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Domínguez, E., & Fernández, H. R. (1998). Calidad de los ríos de la Cuenca Salí (Tucumán, Argentina) medida por un índice biótico. Serie Conservación de la Naturaleza, 12, 1–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Domínguez, E., Giorgi, A., & Gómez, N. (Comp.). (2020). La biodindicación en el monitoreo y evaluación de los sistemas fluviales de La Argentina. Bases para el análisis de la integridad ecológica. Buenos Aires: Eudeba.

  • Dos Santos, D.A., Molineri, C., Reynaga, M.C. & Basualdo, C. (2011). Which index is the best to assess stream health?. Ecological Indicators, 11, 582–589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.08.004.

  • Edwards, P. M. (2016). The value of long-term stream invertebrate data collected by citizen scientists. PLoS One. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.015371.

  • European Environmental Agency. (2016). Biological assessment of river quality. https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/92-9167-001-4/page021.html. Accessed 26 April 2020.

  • Fernández, H. R. (2015). From an informed public to social learning for water management: is Argentina cast adrift. International Journal of Social Science and Humanities Research, 3, 66–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghetti, P. F., & Bonazzi, G. (1980). 3rd Technical Seminar. Biological water assessment methods. Europe: Commission of the European Communities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gómez, N. (2020). Presentación. In: Domínguez, E., Giorgi, A., & Gómez, N. (Comp.), La bioindicación en el monitoreo y evaluación de los sistemas fluviales de La Argentina. Bases para el análisis de la integridad ecológica (pp. XI-XII). Buenos Aires: Eudeba.

  • Gualdoni, C. M., & Corigliano, M. C. (1991). El ajuste de un índice biótico para uso regional. Revista Universidad Nacional de Río Cuarto, 11, 43–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, L., Bonetto, C., Marrochi, N., Scalise, A., Fanelli, S., Liess, M., Lydy, M.J., Chiu, M.C. & Resh, V.H. (2017). Species at Risk (SPEAR) index indicates effects of insecticides on stream invertebrate communities in soy production regions of the Argentine Pampas. Science of the Total Environment. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.12.016.

  • Jørgensen, S. E. (2005). Introduction. In: Jørgensen, S. E., Costanza, R., & Xu, F. L. (Eds.), Handbook of Ecological Indicators for Assessment of Ecosystem Health (pp. 1-4). Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group.

  • Karr, J. R. (1991). Biological integrity: a long-neglected aspect of water resource management. Ecological Applications, 1(1), 66–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karr, J. R. (1992). Ecological integrity. Protecting earth’s life support systems. In R. Costanza, B. G. Norton, & B. D. Haskell (Eds.), Ecosystem Health (pp. 223–238). Washington: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karr, J. R. (1996). Ecological integrity and ecological health are not the same. In P. Schultz (Ed.), National Academy of Engineering within Ecological Constraints (pp. 97–109). Washington: The National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karr, J. R., & Chu, E. W. (2000). Introduction: sustaining living rivers. Assessing the Ecological Integrity of Running Waters. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-4164-2_1.

  • Loeb, S. L. (1994). An ecological context for biological monitoring. In: Loeb, S. L. & Spacie, A. (Eds.), Biological Monitoring of Aquatic Systems (pp. 3-7). Boca Raton: Lewis Publishers.

  • Logan, P. (2001). Ecological quality assessment of rivers and integrated catchment management in England and Wales. Journal of Limnology. https://doi.org/10.4081/jlimnol.2001.s1.25.

  • Loiselle, S. A., Gasparini Fernandes Cunha, D., Shupe, S., Valiente, E., Rocha, L., Heasley, E., et al. (2016). Micro and macroscale drivers of nutrient concentrations in urban streams in South, Central and North America. PLoS One. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0162684.

  • Mehari, A. K., Wondie, A., Mingist, M., & Vijverberg, J. (2014). Spatial and seasonal variation in the macro-invertebrates and physico-chemical parameters of the Enfranz River, Lake Tana sub-basin (Ethiopia). Ecohydrology & Hydrobiology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecohyd.2014.07.004.

  • Miserendino, M. L., & Pizzolón, L. A. (1999). Rapid assessment of river water quality using macroinvertebrates: a family level biotic index for the Patagonic Andean zone. Acta Limnologica Brasiliensia, 11, 137–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nerbonne, J. F., & Vondracek, B. C. (2003). Volunteer macroinvertebrate monitoring: assessing training needs through examining error and biasin untrained volunteers. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 22, 152–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, N. O. (1999). The meaning of health. Ecosystem Health, 5, 65–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penrose, D., & Call, S. M. (1995). Volunteer monitoring of benthic macroinvertebrates: regulatory biologists’ perspectives. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 14, 203–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prat, N., Ríos, B., Acosta, R., & Rieradevall, M. (2009). Los macroinvertebrados como indicadores de calidad de las aguas. In E. Domínguez & H. R. Fernández (Eds.), Macroinvertebrados bentónicos sudamericanos. Sistemática y biología (pp. 631–654). Fundación Miguel Lillo: Tucumán.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinlivan, L., Chapman, D. V., & Sullivan, T. (2020). Applying citizen science to monitor for the Sustainable Development Goal Indicator 6.3.2: a review. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-020-8193-6.

  • Rae, M., Miró, A., Hall, J., O’Brien, K., & O'Brien, D. (2019). Evaluating the validity of a simple citizen science index for assessing the ecological status of urban drainage ponds. Ecological Indicators. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.10.053.

  • Rapport, D. J., Thorpe, C., & Regier, H. A. (1980). Commentary. Ecosystem medicine. In: Calhoun, J. C. (Ed.), Perspectives on Adaptation, Environment and Population (pp. 180-189). New York: Praeger.

  • Rodrigues Capítulo, A., Tangorra, A., & Ocon, C. (2001). Use of benthic macroinvertebrates to assess the biological status of Pampean streams in Argentina. Aquatic Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011456916792.

  • Rodrigues Capítulo, A., Ocón, C. S., & Tangorra, M. (2003). Una visión bentónica de arroyos y ríos pampeanos. In: Rodrigues Capítulo, A., & Gómez, N. (Eds.), Biología Acuática: Diatomeas y macroinvertebrados bentónicos en el monitoreo de sistemas lóticos bonaerenses (pp. 1-18). Buenos Aires: Instituto de Limnología “Dr. Raúl A. Ringuelet”.

  • von Schiller, D., Acuña, V., Aristi, I., Arroita, M., Basaguren, A., Bellinc, A., et al. (2017). River ecosystem processes: a synthesis of approaches, criteria of use and sensitivity to environmental stressors. Science of the Total Environment, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.04.081

  • Torremorell, A., Hegoburu, C., Brandimarte, A. L., Costa Rodrigues, E. H., & Pompêo, M. Cardoso da Silva, S., et al. (In Press). Present and future threats for the ecological quality management of South American freshwater ecosystems. Inland Waters.

  • Tuffery, G. (1979). Incidencias ecológicas de la polución de las aguas corrientes. Reveladores biológicos de la polución. In: Pesson, P. (Ed.), La contaminación de las aguas continentales. Incidencias sobre las biocenosis acuáticas (pp. 215-255). Madrid: Mundi Prensa.

  • Vallania, E. A., Garelis, P. A., Trípole, E. S., & Gil, M. A. (1996). Un índice biótico para las sierras de San Luis (Argentina). Revista Universidad Nacional de Río Cuarto, 16, 129–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vollmer, D., Kashif, K., Souter, N. J., Farrell, T., Dudgeon, D., Sullivan, C.A., et al. (2018). Integrating the social, hydrological and ecological dimensions of freshwater health: the Freshwater Health Index. Science of the Total Environment, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.01.040

  • Vugteveen, P., Leuven, R. S. E. W., Huijbregts, M. A. J., & Lenders, H. J. R. (2006). Redefinition and elaboration of river ecosystem health: perspective for river management. Hydrobiologia. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-005-1920-8.

  • Water Framework 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. Off J L 2000; 327:1–73. Accessed 10 February 2020.

  • Wells, P. G. (2005). Assessing marine ecosystem health—concepts and indicators, with reference to the Bay of Fundy and Gulf of Maine, Northwest Atlantic. In S. E. Jørgensen, R. Costanza, & F. L. Xu (Eds.), Handbook of Ecological Indicators for Assessment of Ecosystem Health (pp. 395–430). Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, S. J., Roy, A. H., Jackson, C. R., Bernhardt, E. S., Carter, T. L., Filoso, S., et al. (2009). Twenty-six key research questions in urban stream ecology: an assessment of the state of the science. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 28, 1080–1098.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wicklum, D., & Davies, R. W. (1995). Ecosystem health and integrity? Canadian Journal of Botany, 73, 997–1000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilhm, J. L. (1975). Biological indicators of pollution. In B. A. Whitton (Ed.), River Ecology (pp. 375–402). Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodward, G., Gessner, M. O., Giller, P. S., Gulis, V., Hladyz, S., Lecerf, A., et al. (2012). Continental-scale effects of nutrient pollution on stream ecosystem functioning. Science. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1219534.

  • Zhang, X., Meng, Y., Xia, J., Wu, B., & She, D. (2018). A combined model for river health evaluation based upon the physical, chemical, and biological elements. Ecological Indicators. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.08.049.

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Iberoamerican Network for the Development of Protocols for the Network for the Ecological Assessment, Management and Restoration of Rivers (IBEPECOR), funded by the Ibero-American Program for Science & Technology for the development (CYTED, Ref. P415RT0143).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Aquatic Ecology Group (GIEA), INEDES (CONICET-UNLu), Departamento de Ciencias Básicas, Universidad Nacional de Luján, Luján, Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Luciana Rocha

  2. Freshwater Biogeochemistry Programme (BED), INEDES (CONICET-UNLu), Luján, Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Cecilia Hegoburu

  3. Ecology Program of Protists and Fungi (PEPHON), INEDES (CONICET-UNLu), Luján, Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Ana Torremorell & Claudia Feijoó

  4. Pyrenean Institute of Ecology, Spanish National Research Council (IPE-CSIC), 50059, Zaragoza, Spain

    Enrique Navarro

  5. Facultad de Ciencias Naturales e Instituto Miguel Lillo, IBN (CONICET-UNT), San Miguel de Tucumán, Argentina

    Hugo R. Fernández

Authors
  1. Luciana Rocha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cecilia Hegoburu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ana Torremorell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Claudia Feijoó
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Enrique Navarro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Hugo R. Fernández
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luciana Rocha.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1

Table 1 List of articles reviewed relating to the use of ecological indices to assess the impact of different environmental stressors in aquatic environments from Argentina
Full size table

Appendix 2

Representation of the different types of index used in the sampling sites from each peer-reviewed studies (kml file)

figure a

Appendix 3. Survey on the use of biological indices in Argentina

  1. 1

    How much experience do you have in bioindication?

    1. a

      ≤ 2 years

    2. b

      Between 3 and 6 years

    3. c

      > 6 years

  2. 2

    What method do you use the most?

    1. a

      Biotic index

    2. b

      Diversity and derivatives

    3. c

      Multimetric

    4. d

      Functional

    5. e

      Others

  3. 3

    The use of these methods was used by some application agency?

    1. a

      Yes

      1. i

        Once

      2. j

        More than one ocassion

    2. b

      No

  4. 4

    Would you recommend to a colleague the method used?

    1. a

      Yes

    2. b

      No

  5. 5

    Would you recommend to the application agency the method used?

    1. a

      Yes

    2. b

      No

  6. 6

    Is it possible its application by a technician or non-scientific personnel?

    1. a

      Yes

    2. b

      No

  7. 7

    If the answer was yes in the previous question, how long would it take to train them?

    1. a

      < 3 months

    2. b

      Between 4 and 6 months

    3. c

      > 6 months

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rocha, L., Hegoburu, C., Torremorell, A. et al. Use of ecosystem health indicators for assessing anthropogenic impacts on freshwaters in Argentina: a review. Environ Monit Assess 192, 611 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-020-08559-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-020-08559-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation