Relationships of field habitat measurements, visual habitat indices, and land cover to benthic macroinvertebrates in urbanized streams of the Santa Clara Valley, California

American Fisheries Society Symposium

Volumn 2005, Issue 47, 2005, Pages 193-212

  Fend, Steven V ^a   Carter, James L ^a   Kearns, Faith R ^b  

^a U S GEOLOGICAL SURVEY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33846219500     PISSN: 08922284     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Allan, J. D., D. L. Erickson, and J. Fay. 1997. The influence of catchment land use on stream integrity across multiple spatial scales. Freshwater Biology 37:149-161.
2. Alba-Tercedor, J., and A. Pujante. 2000. Running- water biomonitoring in Spain: opportunities for a predictive approach. Pages 207-216 in J. F. Wright, D. W. Sutcliffe, and M. T. Furse, editors. Assessing the biological quality of fresh waters: RIVPACS and other techniques. Freshwater Biological Association, Ambleside, Cumbria, UK.
3. Andrews, D. F. 1983. Entrainment of gravel from naturally sorted riverbed material. Geological Society of America Bulletin 94:1225-1231.
4. Barbour, M. T., J. Gerritsen, B. D. Snyder, and J. B. Stribling. 1999. Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in streams and wadeable rivers: periphyton, benthic macroinvertebrates and fish, 2nd edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, EPA 841-B-99-002, Washington, D.C.
5. Bargos, T., J. M. Mesanza, A. Basaguren, and E. Orive. 1990. Assessing river water quality by means of multifactorial methods using macroinvertebrates. A comparative study of main water courses of Biscay. Water Research 24:1-10.
6. Beavan, L., J. Sadler, and C. Pinder. 2001. The invertebrate fauna of a physically modified river. Hydrobiologia 445:97-108.
7. Booth, D. B., and C. R. Jackson. 1997. Urbanization of aquatic systems: degradation thresholds, stormwater detection, and the limits of mitigation. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 33:1077-1091.
8. California Department of Fish and Game. 2002. The California environmental information catalog. Roads. Available: http://gis.ca.gov/catalog/ BrowseRecord.epl?id=269. (June 2003)
9. California Department of Fish and Game. 2003. California stream bioassessment procedure. Revision, December, 2003. California Department of Fish and Game, Water Pollution Control Laboratory, Sacramento, California. Available: www.dfg.ca.gov/cabw/csbp_2003.pdf. (March 2004)
10. Carter, J. L., and S. V. Fend. 2000. The distribution and abundance of lotie macroinvertebrates during spring 1997 in seven streams of the Santa Clara Valley area, California. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 00-68, Menlo Park, California.
11. Carter, J. L., and S. V. Fend. 2005. Setting limits: the development and use of factor-ceiling distributions for an urban assessment using macroinvertebrates. Pages 179-191 in L. R. Brown, R. H. Gray, R. M. Hughes, and M. R. Meador, editors. Effects of urbanization on stream ecosystems. American Fisheries Society, Symposium 47, Bethesda, Maryland.
12. Carter, J. L., S. V. Fend, and S. S. Kennelly. 1996. The relationships among three habitat scales and stream benthic invertebrate community structure. Fresh-water Biology 35:281-299.
13. Choy, M. L. 2004. A comparison of the effects of regulated and non-regulated hydrologic regimes on fine sediment deposition and benthic macroinvertebrate distributions. Senior thesis. University of California, Berkeley.
14. Cuffney, T. F., H. Zappia, E. M. P. Giddings, and J. F. Coles. 2005. Effects of urbanization on benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages in contrasting environmental settings: Boston, Massachusetts; Birmingham, Alabama; and Salt Lake City, Utah. Pages 361-407 in L. R. Brown, R. M. Hughes, R. Gray, and M. R. Meador, editors. Effects of urbanization on stream ecosystems. American Fisheries Society, Symposium 47, Bethesda, Maryland.
15. Dovciak, A. L., and J. A. Perry. 2002. In search of effective scales for stream management: does agroecoregion, watershed, or their intersection best explain the variance in stream macroinvertebrate communities? Environmental Management 30:365-377.
16. Duda, A. M., D. R. Lenat, and D. L. Penrose. 1982. Water quality in urban streams - what we can expect. Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation 54:1139-1147.
17. Edmunds, G. E, S. L. Jensen, and L. Berner. 1976. The mayflies of North and Central America. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.
18. Fitzpatrick, F. A., I. R. Waite, P. J. D'Arconte, M. R. Meador, M. A. Maupin, and M. E. Gurtz. 1998. Revised methods for characterizing stream habitat in the National Water-Quality Assessment Program. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 98-4052, Raleigh, North Carolina.
19. Fitzpatrick, F. A., B. C. Scudder, B. N. Lenz, and D. L. Sullivan. 2001. Effects of multi-scale environmental characteristics on agricultural stream biota in eastern Wisconsin, Journal of the American Water Resources Association 37:1489-1507.
20. Frissell, C. A., W. J. Liss, C. E. Warren, and M. D. Hurley. 1986. A hierarchical framework for stream habitat classification: viewing streams in a watershed context. Environmental Management 10:199-214.
21. Hall, L. W., R. P. Morgan, I. I., E. S. Perry, and A. Waltz. 2002. Development of a provisional physical habitat index for Maryland freshwater streams. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 77:265-291.
22. Hannan, H. H. 1979. Chemical modifications in reservoir-regulated streams. Pages 75-94 in J. V. Ward and J. A. Stanford, editors. The ecology of regulated streams. Plenum, New York.
23. Hawkes, H. A. 1975. Chapter 5. River zonation and classification. Pages 312-374 in B. A. Whitton., editor. River ecology. University of California Press, Berkeley.
24. Hawkins, C. P., R. H. Norris, J. N. Hogue, and J. W. Feminella. 2000. Development and evaluation of predictive models for measuring the biological integrity of streams. Ecological Applications 10:1456-1477.
25. Hughes, R. M. 1995. Defining acceptable biological status by comparing with reference conditions. Pages 31-47 in W. S. Davis and T. P. Simon, editors. Biological assessment and criteria: tools for water resource planning and decision making. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, Florida.
26. Hughes, R. M., D. P. Larsen, and J. M. Omernik. 1986. Regional reference sites: a method for assessing stream potentials. Environmental Management 10:629-635.
27. Jones, R. C. and C. C. Clark. 1988. Impact of watershed urbanization on stream insect communities. Water Resources Bulletin 23:1047-1055.
28. Kearns, F. R. 2003. The relationship between physical habitat and biology in freshwater ecosystems. Doctoral dissertation. University of California, Berkeley.
29. Kennen, J. G. 1999. Relation of macroinvertebrate community impairment to catchment characteristics in New Jersey streams. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 35:939-955.
30. Kerans, B. L., and J. R. Karr. 1994. A benthic index of biotic integrity (B-IBI) for rivers of the Tennessee Valley. Ecological Applications 4:768-785.
31. Klein, R. D. 1979. Urbanization and stream quality impairment. Water Resources Bulletin 15:948-963.
32. Leland, H. V., and S. V. Fend. 1998. Benthic invertebrate distributions in the San Joaquin River, California, in relation to physical and chemical factors. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 55:1051-1067.
33. Lenat, D. R., and J. K. Crawford. 1994. Effects of land use on water quality and aquatic biota of three North Carolina piedmont streams. Hydrobiologia 294:185-199.
34. Ligon, F. K., W. E. Dietrich, and W. J. Trush. 1995. Downstream ecological effects of dams: a geomorphic perspective. BioScience 45(3):183-192.
35. Marchant, R., A. Hirst, R. Norris, and L. Metzeling. 1999. Classification of macroinvertebrate communities across drainage basins in Victoria, Australia: consequences of sampling on a broad spatial scale for predictive modeling. Freshwater Biology 41:253-268.
36. McCune, B., and M. J. Mefford. 1999. Multivariate analysis of ecological data version 4.20. MjM Software, Gleneden Beach, Oregon.
37. Miles, S. R. and C. B. Goudey. 1997. Ecological subregions of California. Section and subsection descriptions. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, R5-EM-TP-005, San Francisco.
38. Minshall, G. W. 1984. Aquatic insect-substratum relationships. Pages 358-400 in V. H. Resh, and D. M. Rosenberg, editors. The ecology of aquatic insects. Praeger Publishers, New York.
39. Morley, S. A., and J. R. Karr. 2002. Assessing and restoring the health of urban streams in the Puget Sound basin. Conservation Biology 16:1498-1509.
40. Moulton, S. R., II, J. L. Carter, S. A. Grotheer, T. F. Cuffney, and T. M. Short. 2000. Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory-processing, taxonomy, and quality control of benthic macroinvertebrate samples. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 00-212, Denver.
41. Paul, M. J., and J. L. Meyer. 2001. Streams in the urban landscape. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 32:333-365.
42. Pedersen, E. R., and M. A. Perkins. 1986. The use of benthic invertebrate data for evaluating impacts of urban runoff. Hydrobiology 139:13-22.
43. Petersen, R. C. Jr. 1992. The RCE: a riparian, channel, and environmental inventory for small streams in the agricultural landscape. Freshwater Biology 27:295-306.
44. Pratt, J. M., R. A. Coler, and P. J. Godfrey. 1981. Ecological effects of urban stormwater runoff on benthic macroinvertebrates inhabiting the Green River, Massachusetts. Hydrobiologia 83:29-42.
45. Rankin, E.T. 1995. Habitat indices in water resource quality assessments. Pages 181-208 in W. S. Davis, and T. P. Simon, editors. Biological assessment and criteria: tools for water resource planning and decision making. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, Florida.
46. Richards, C., R. J. Haro, L. B. Johnson, and G. E. Host. 1997. Catchment and reach-scale properties as indicators of macroinvertebrate species traits. Freshwater Biology 37:219-230.
47. Robinson, C. T., and G. W. Minshall. 1998. Regional assessment of wadable streams in Idaho, USA. Great Basin Naturalist 58:54-65.
48. Roy, A. H., A. D. Rosemond, M. J. Paul, D. S. Leigh, and J. B. Wallace. 2003. Stream macroinvertebrate response to catchment urbanization (Georgia, U.S.A.) Freshwater Biology 48:329-346.
49. Santa Clara Basin Watershed Management Initiative. 2001. Watershed Management Plan, volume 1 unabridged. Watershed Characteristics Report. Available: www.scbwmi.org.
50. Short, T. M., E. M. P. Giddings, H. Zappia, and J. F. Coles. 2005. Urbanization effects on stream habitat characteristics in Boston, Massachusetts; Birmingham, Alabama; and Salt Lake City, Utah. Pages 317-332 in L. R. Brown, R. H. Gray, R. M. Hughes, and M. R. Meador, editors. Effects of urbanization on stream ecosystems. American Fisheries Society, Symposium 47, Bethesda, Maryland.
51. Sponseller, R. A., E. F. Benfield, and H. M. Valett. 2001. Relationships between land use, spatial scale and stream macroinvertebrate communities. Freshwater Biology 46:1409-1424.
52. StatSoft, Inc. 2004. STATISTICA (data analysis software system), version 6. Tulsa, Oklahoma.
53. Stanford, J. A., and J. V. Ward. 1979. Stream regulation in North America. Pages 215-236 in J. V. Ward and J. A. Stanford, editors. The ecology of regulated streams. Plenum, New York.
54. Stauffer, J. C., and R. M. Goldstein. 1997. Comparison of three qualitative habitat indices and their applicability to prairie streams. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 17:348-361.
55. Strahler, A. N. 1957. Quantitative analysis of watershed geomorphology. American Geophysical Union Transactions 38:913-920.
56. Tate, C. M., and J. S. Heiny. 1995. The ordination of benthic invertebrate communities in the South Platte River basin in relation to environmental factors. Freshwater Biology 33:439-454.
57. Townsend, C. R., S. Dolédec, R. Norris, K. Peacock, and C. Arbuclde. 2003. The influence of scale and geography on relationships between stream community composition and landscape variables: description and prediction. Freshwater Biology 48:768-785.
58. USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2002a. Summary of biological assessment programs and biocriteria development for states, tribes, territories, and interstate commissions: streams and wadeable rivers. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-822-R-02-048, Washington, D.C.
59. USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2002b. National recommended water quality criteria: 2002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-822-R-02-047, Washington, D.C.
60. Vogelmann, J. E., S. M. Howard, L. Yang, C. R. Larson, B. K. Wylie, and N. Van Driel. 2001. Completion of the 1990s National Land Cover Data Set for the conterminous United States from Landsat Thematic Mapper data and ancillary data sources. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 67:650-662.
61. Walsh, C. J. 2000. Urban impacts on the ecology of receiving waters: a framework for assessment, conservation and restoration. Hydrobiologia 431:107-114.
62. Walsh, C. J., A. K. Sharpe, P. F. Breen, and J. A. Sonneman. 2001. Effects of urbanization on streams of the Melbourne region, Victoria, Australia. I. Benthic macroinvertebrate communities. Freshwater Biology 46:535-551.
63. Wang, L., J. Lyons, and P. Kanehl. 1998. Development and evaluation of a habitat rating system for low-gradient Wisconsin streams. North American Journal of Fisheries management 18:775-785.
64. Waters, T. F. 1995. Sediment in streams: sources, biological effects, and control. American Fisheries Society, Monograph 7, Bethesda, Maryland.
65. Weigel, B. M., L. Wang, P. W. Rasmussen, J. T. Butcher, P. M. Stewart, T. P. Simon, and M. T. Wiley. 2003. Relative influence of variables at multiple spatial scales on stream macroinvertebrates in the Northern Lakes and Forest ecoregion, U.S.A. Freshwater Biology 48:1440-1461.
66. Wolman, M. G. 1954. A method of sampling coarse river-bed material. Transactions of the American Geophysical Union 35:951-956.
67. Wright, J. F. 1995. Development and use of a system for predicting the macroinvertebrate fauna in flowing waters. Australian Journal of Ecology 20:181-197.
68. Yoder, C. O. and E. T. Rankin. 1995. Biological criteria program development and implementation in Ohio. Pages 109-144 in W. S. Davis and T. P. Simon, editors. Biological assessment and criteria: tools for water resource planning and decision making. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, Florida.
69. Zar, J. H. 1974. Biostatistical analysis. Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.