A multi-agency comparison of aquatic macroinvertebrate-based stream bioassessment methodologies

Ecological Indicators

Volumn 1, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 279-292

  Houston, L ^a   Barbour, M T ^b   Lenat, D ^c   Penrose, D ^c  

^a Ala Dept of Environmental Management   (United States)

^b TETRA TECH INC   (United States)

^c North Carolina Division of Water Quality   (United States)

Author keywords

Bioassessment; Methods comparison; Multistate comparison; Performance characteristics; Stream macroinvertebrates; Water quality assessment

Indexed keywords

EID: 37149035936     PISSN: 1470160X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/s1470-160x(02)00024-9     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. ADEM (Alabama Department of Environmental Management), 2000. Standard Operating Procedures and Quality Control Assurance Manual, Vol. 2: Freshwater Macroinvertebrate Biological Assessment. Aquatic Assessment Unit, Field Operations Division, Alabama Department of Environmental Management. Montgomery, Alabama. (Available from: V. Hulcher, Environmental Indicators Section, Field Operations Division, Alabama Department of Environmental Management, 1890 Dickinson Drive, Montgomery, AL 36109, USA).
2. Arrhenius O. Species and area. J. Ecol. 9 (1921) 95-99
3. Barbour M.T., Gerritsen J., Griffith G.E., Frydenborg R., McCarron E., White J.S., and Bastian M.L. A framework for biological criteria for Florida streams using benthic macroinvertebrates. J. North Am. Benthological Soc. 15 (1996) 185-211
4. Barbour, M.T., Gerritson, J., Snyder, B.D., Stribling, J.B., 1999. Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Streams and Wadeable Rivers: Periphyton, Benthic Macroinvertebrates, and Fish, 2nd Edition. EPA 841-B-99-002. Office of Water, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, USA.
5. Beck Jr. W.M. The streams of Florida. Bull. Florida State Museum 10 (1965) 81-126
6. Colwell, R.K., Coddington, J.A., 1995. Estimating terrestrial biodiversity through extrapolation. In: D.L. Hawksworth (Ed.), Biodiversity-Measurement and Estimation. Chapman & Hall, London, pp. 101-118.
7. Davis, W.S., Snyder, B.D., Stribling, J.B., Stoughton, C., 1996. Summary of State Biological Assessment Programs for Streams and Rivers. EPA 230-R-96-007. Office of Planning, Policy, and Evaluation, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, USA.
8. Diamond J.M., Barbour M.T., and Stribling J.B. Characterizing and comparing bioassessment methods and their results: a perspective. J. North Am. Benthological Soc. 15 (1996) 713-727
9. FDEP (Florida Department of Environmental Protection), 1996. Standard Operating Procedures for Biological Assessment. Biological Section, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Tallahassee, Florida. (Available from: E. McCarron, Biological Section, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, 2600 Blair Stone Road, Tallahassee, FL 32399, USA).
10. Hannaford M.J., and Resh V.H. Variability in macroinvertebrate rapid-bioassessment surveys and habitat assessments in a northern California stream. J. North Am. Benthological Soc. 14 (1995) 430-439
11. ITFM (Intergovernmental Task Force on Monitoring Water Quality), 1995. Performance-Based Methods System for Biological Collection Methods: A Framework for Examining Method Comparability: Relations of Analytical Performance-Based Characteritics to Biological Systems. In: The Strategy for Improving Water Quality Monitoring in the US: Final Report of the Intergovernmental Task Force on Monitoring Water Quality in the US. Technical Appendix O. Report #OFR95-742. US Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia. (Available from: http://wi.water.usgs.gov/pmethods/PBMS/references.html).
12. Klemm, D.J., Lewis, P.A., Fulk, F., Lazorchak, J.M., 1990. Macroinvertebrate field and laboratory methods for evaluating the biological integrity of surface waters. EPA 600-4-90-030. Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, US Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
13. KYDEP (Kentucky Department of Environmental Protection), 1993. Methods for Assessing Biological Integrity of Surface Waters. Ecological Support Section, Water Quality Branch, Division of Water. Frankfort, Kentucky.
14. Lenat D.R. A biotic index for the southeastern US: derivation and list of tolerance values, with criteria for assigning water-quality ratings. J. North Am. Benthological Soc. 12 (1993) 279-290
15. Lenz, B.N., Miller, M.A., 1996. Comparison of aquatic macroinvertebrate samples collected using different field methods. USGS Fact Sheet FS-216-96. US Geological Survey, Madison, WI, USA.
16. Maxted J.R., Barbour M.T., Gerritsen J., Poretti V., Primrose N., Silvia A., Penrose D., and Renfrow R. Assessment framework for mid-Atlantic coastal plain streams using benthic invertebrates. J. North Am. Benthological Soc. 19 (2000) 128-144
17. May, R.M., 1975. Patterns of species abundance and diversity. In: Cody, M.L., Diamond, J.M. (Eds.), Ecology and Evolution of Communities. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, pp. 81-120.
18. MDEQ (Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality), 1999. Field Services Standard Operating Procedures Manual (Draft), Vol. 2: Macroinvertebrate Section. Field Services Division, Office of Pollution Control, Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality, Pearl, Mississippi. (Available from: M. Beiser, Field Services Division, Office of Pollution Control, Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality, 1542 Old Whitfield Road, Pearl, MS 39208, USA.)
19. NCDWQ (North Carolina Division of Water Quality), 1995. Standard Operating Procedures: Biological Monitoring. Environmental Sciences Branch, North Carolina Division of Water Quality, Raleigh, North Carolina. (Available from: T. MacPherson, Environmental Sciences Branch, North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 1621 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699, USA).
20. NMDCB (National Methods and Data Comparability Board), 2000. Methods Board Performance-Based Method System Position Paper. (Available from: http://wi.water.usgs.gov/pmethods/PBMS/position.html).
21. Preston F.W. The commonness and rarity of species. Ecology 29 (1948) 254-283
22. SCDHEC (South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control), 1998. Standard Operating and Quality Control Procedures for Macroinvertebrate Sampling. Technical Report No. 004-98. Bureau of Water, Division of Water Monitoring, Assessment and Protection, South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, Columbia, South Carolina. (Available from: B. Younginer, Bureau of Water; Division of Water Monitoring, Assessment and Protect; Aquatic Biology Section, 2600 Bull Street, Columbia, SC 29201, USA).
23. Slocomb, J., Dickson, K.L., 1978. Estimating the total number of species in a biological community. In: Dickson, K.L., Cairns, J., Livingston, R.J. (Eds.), Biological Data in Water Pollution Assessment: Quantitative and Statistical Analysis. ASTM STP 652. American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, USA, pp. 38-552.
24. TNDEC (Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation), 1996. Biological Standard Operating Procedures Manual, Vol. 1: Freshwater Aquatic Macroinvertebrates. Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Water Pollution Control. Nashville, TN. (Available from: J. Broach, Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Water Pollution Control, 6th Floor L and C Annex, 401 Church Street, Nashville, TN 37243, USA).
25. USEPA (US Environmental Protection Agency), 1999. Level III and IV ecoregions of Alabama. National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, US Environmental Protection Agency, Corvallis, Oregon. (Available from: J. Omernik, USDA-NRCS, 200 SW 35th Street, Corvalis, OR 97333, USA).
26. USGS (US Geological Survey), 1994. Report of the Interagency Biological Methods Workshop. Open-File Report 94-490. US Geological Survey, Raleigh, NC, USA.