Sampling effort needed to estimate condition and species richness in the Ohio river, USA

Environmental Monitoring and Assessment

Volumn 155, Issue 1-4, 2009, Pages 157-167

  Blocksom, Karen ^a   Emery, Erich ^b   Thomas, Jeff ^b  

^a U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

^b Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission   (United States)

Author keywords

Biological assessment; Electrofishing; Field sampling effort; Fish assemblage; Large river; Nonwadeable river

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT; ELECTROFISHING; FIELD SAMPLING EFFORT; FISH ASSEMBLAGE; LARGE RIVER; NONWADEABLE RIVER;

FISH; LAKES; MEATS;

RIVERS;

ELECTROFISHING; ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; RIVER WATER; SAMPLING; SPECIES RICHNESS; WATER QUALITY;

ARTICLE; FISH; FISHING; NONHUMAN; RIVER; SAMPLING; SCORING SYSTEM; SPECIES HABITAT; SPECIES RICHNESS; UNITED STATES;

ANIMALS; BIODIVERSITY; ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING; FISHES; GEOGRAPHY; RIVERS; UNITED STATES;

NORTH AMERICA; OHIO RIVER; UNITED STATES;

EID: 68149181554     PISSN: 01676369     EISSN: 15732959     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10661-008-0425-0     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Angermier, P. L., & Karr, J. R. (1986). Applying an index of biotic integrity based on stream-fish communities: Considerations in sampling and interpretation. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 6, 418-427. doi: 10.1577/1548-8659(1986)6<418:AAIOBI>2.0.CO;2.
2. Bady, P., Doledec, S., Fesl, C., Gayraud, S., Bacchi, M., & Scholl, F. (2005). Use of invertebrate traits for the biomonitoring of European large rivers: The effects of sampling effort on genus richness and functional diversity. Freshwater Biology, 50, 159-173. doi: 10.1111/ j.1365-2427.2004.01287.x.
3. Chernick, M. R. (1999). Bootstrap methods: A practitioner's guide. New York: Wiley.
4. Colwell, R. K. (2005). EstimateS 7.5 user's guide. Retrieved January 2, 2008, from University of Connecticut Web site: http://purl.oclc.org/ estimates.
5. Dauwalter, D. C., & Pert, E. J. (2003). Electrofishing effort and fish species richness and relative abundance in Ozark highland streams of Arkansas. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 23, 1152-1166. doi: 10.1577/MO1-144.
6. Emery, E. B., Simon, T. P., McCormick, F. H., Angermeier, P. L., DeShon, J. E., Yoder, C. O., et al. (2003). Development of a multimetric index for assessing the biological condition of the Ohio River. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 132, 791-808. doi: 10.1577/T01-076.
7. Etnier, D. A., & Starnes, W. C. (1993). The fishes of Tennessee. Knoxville: The University of Tennessee Press.
8. Hughes, R. M., Kaufmann, P. R., Herlihy, A. T., Intelmann, S. S., Corbett, S. C., Arbogast, M. C., et al. (2002). Electrofishing distance needed to estimate fish species richness in raftable Oregon rivers. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 22, 1229-1240. doi: 10.1577/1548-8675(2002)022<1229:EDNTEF>2.0.CO;2.
9. Koenker, R., & Bassett, G. (1978). Regression quantiles. Econometrica, 46, 33-50. doi: 10.2307/1913643.
10. Lapointe, N. W. R., Corkum, L. D., & Mandrak, N. E. (2006). A comparison of methods for sampling fish diversity in shallow offshore waters of large rivers. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 26, 503-513. doi: 10.1577/M05-091.1.
11. Lyons, J. (1992). The length of stream to sample with a towed electrofishing unit when fish species richness is estimated. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 12, 198-203. doi: 10.1577/ 1548-8675(1992)012<0198:TLOSTS>2.3.CO;2.
12. Lyons, J., Piette, R. R., & Niermeyer, K. W. (2001). Development, validation, and application of a fish-based index of biotic integrity for Wisconsin's large rivers. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 130, 1077-1094. doi: 10.1577/ 1548-8659(2001)130<1077:DVAAOA>2.0.CO;2.
13. Manly, B. F. J. (1997). Randomization, bootstrap, and Monte Carlo methods in biology. London: Chapman and Hall.
14. Meador, M. R. (2005). Single-pass versus two-pass boat electrofishing for characterizing river fish assemblages: Species richness estimates and sampling distance. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 134, 59-67. doi: 10.1577/ft03-094.1.
15. Melo, A. S., Bini, L. M., & Thomaz, S. M. (2007). Assessment of methods to estimate aquatic macrophyte species richness in extrapolated sample sizes. Aquatic Botany, 86, 377-384. doi: 10.1016/ j.aquabot.2007.01.005.
16. Ohio EPA (1989). Addendum to: Biological criteria for the protection of aquatic life: Volume II: Users manual for biological field assessment of Ohio surface waters. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio Environmental Protection Agency.
17. ORSANCO (1994). Ohio river water quality fact book. Cincinnati, Ohio: Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission.
18. Pflieger, W. L. (1997). The fishes of Missouri. Jefferson City, Missouri: Missouri Department of Conservation.
19. Reynolds, L., Herlihy, A. T., Kaufmann, P. R., Gregory, S. V., & Hughes, R. M. (2003). Electrofishing effort requirements for assessing species richness and biotic integrity in western Oregon streams. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 23, 450-461. doi: 10.1577/ 1548-8675(2003)023<0450:EERFAS>2.0.CO;2.
20. Sanders, R. E. (1992). Day versus night electrofishing catches from near-shore waters of the Ohio and Muskingum rivers. The Ohio Journal of Science, 92, 51-59.
21. Sanders, R. E., Miltner, R. J., Yoder, C. O., & Rankin, E. T. (1999). The use of external deformities, erosions, lesions, and tumors (DELT anomalies) in fish assemblages for characterizing aquatic resources: A case study of seven Ohio streams. In T. P. Simon (Ed.), Assessing the sustainability and biological integrity of water resources using fish communities (pp. 225-248). Boca Raton, FL: CRC.
22. Simon, T. P., & Sanders, R. E. (1999). Applying an index of biotic integrity based on great river fish communities: Considerations in sampling and interpretation. In T. P. Simon (Ed.), Assessing the sustainability and biological integrity of water resources using fish communities (pp. 475-506). Boca Raton, FL: CRC.
23. Smith, K. L., & Jones, M. L. (2005). Watershed-level sampling effort requirements for determining riverine fish species composition. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 62, 1580-1588. doi: 10.1139/ f05-098.
24. Smith, E. P., & van Belle, G. (1984). Nonparametric estimation of species richness. Biometrics, 40, 119-129. doi: 10.2307/2530750.
25. Trautman, M. B. (1981). The fishes of Ohio. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.