Development of the HKHbios: A new biotic score to assess the river quality in the Hindu Kush-Himalaya

Hydrobiologia

Volumn 651, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 39-58

  Ofenböck, Thomas ^a   Moog, Otto ^a   Sharma, Subodh ^b   Korte, Thomas ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND LIFE SCIENCES   (Austria)

^b KATHMANDU UNIVERSITY   (Nepal)

^c UNIVERSITY OF DUISBURG ESSEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

ASSESS HKH; Benthic invertebrates; Bio indicator; Biotic score; Organic pollution; River quality assessment

Indexed keywords

ASIAN COUNTRIES; ASSESSMENT SYSTEM; BANGLADESH; BENTHIC INVERTEBRATES; BIOLOGICAL SCREENING; CLASS QUALITY; CONTRACT NUMBER; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DISTRIBUTION PATTERNS; ECOLOGICAL STATUS; ECOREGIONS; ENVIRONMENTAL PARAMETER; EUROPEAN UNION; HIMALAYAS; INDEX VALUES; MACROINVERTEBRATES; ORGANIC POLLUTION; PAKISTAN; POST-MONSOON; QUALITY ASSESSMENT; SAMPLING SITE; SCORING SYSTEMS; WEIGHTED AVERAGES;

ANIMALS; ECOLOGY; RIVERS;

RIVER POLLUTION;

BENTHOS; BIOINDICATOR; CORRELATION; ECOREGION; EUROPEAN UNION; GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION; MACROINVERTEBRATE; MOUNTAIN REGION; ORGANIC POLLUTANT; RESEARCH WORK; RIVER WATER; WATER QUALITY;

BANGLADESH; BHUTAN; HINDU KUSH; INDIA; NEPAL; PAKISTAN;

INVERTEBRATA;

EID: 77953873543     PISSN: 00188158     EISSN: 15735117     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10750-010-0289-5     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. 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.
2. ASSESS-HKH Consortium, 2008. HKH site protocol: 3 pp [http://www. assess-hkh. at/downloads/].
3. Barbour, M. T. & M. J. Paul, this issue. Adding value to water resource management through biological assessment of rivers. Hydrobiologia. doi: 10. 1007/s10750-010-0287-7.
4. Barbour, M. T., J. Gerritsen, B. D. Snyder & J. B. Stribling, 1999. Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Streams and Wadeable Rivers: Periphyton, Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Fish, 2nd edn. EPA 841-B-99-002. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
5. Birk, S. & D. Hering, 2002. Waterview Web-Database - A Comprehensive Review of European Assessment Methods for Rivers. FBA News No. 20, Winter 2002. Freshwater Biological Association, Ambleside: 4.
6. Brooks, A. J., T. Haesler, I. Reinfelds & S. Williams, 2005. Hydraulic microhabitats and the distribution of macroinvertebrate assemblages in riffles. Freshwater Biology 50: 331-344.
7. Cohn, F., 1853. Über lebendige Organismen im Trinkwasser. Zeitschrift für klinische Medizin 4: 229-237.
8. Downes, B. J., P. S. Lake, E. S. G. Schreiber & A. Glaister, 2000. Habitat structure, resources and diversity: the separate effects of surface roughness and macroalgae on stream invertebrates. Oecologia 123: 569-581.
9. Drake, J. A., 1984. Species aggregation: the influence of detritus in a benthic invertebrate community. Hydrobiologia 112: 109-115.
10. European Union, 2000. Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council Establishing a Framework for Community Action in the Field of Water Policy. Legislative Acts and Other Instruments. ENV221 CODEC 513. European Union.
11. Feld, C., 2004. Identification and measure of hydromorphological degradation in Central European lowland streams. Hydrobiologia 516: 69-90.
12. Fishar, M. R. & W. P. Williams, 2008. The development of a Biotic Pollution Index for the River Nile in Egypt. Hydrobiologia 598: 17-34.
13. FPAN-DISVI, 1988. Pollution monitoring of Bagmati River, preliminary report. FPAN-DISVI project, Kathmandu, Nepal: 1-27.
14. Gerritsen, J., M. T. Barbour & K. King, 2000. Apples, oranges, and ecoregions: on determining pattern in aquatic assemblages. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 19(3): 487-496.
15. Hassal, A. A., 1850. A microscopic examination of the water supplied to the inhabitants of London and suburban districts. London.
16. Heino, J., P. Louhi & T. Muotka, 2004. Identifying the scales of variability in stream macroinvertebrate abundance, functional composition and assemblage structure. Freshwater Biology 49: 1230-1239.
17. Hering, D., O. Moog, L. Sandin & P. F. M. Verdonschot, 2004. Overview and application of the AQEM assessment system. Hydrobiologia 516: 1-20.
18. Hering, D., R. K. Johnson, S. Kramm, S. Schmutz, K. Szoszkiewicz & P. F. M. Verdonschot, 2006. Assessment of European streams with diatoms, macrophytes, macroinvertebrates and fish: a comparative metric-based analysis of organism response to stress. Freshwater Biology 51(9): 1757-1785.
19. Hildrew, A. G. & C. R. Townsend, 1976. The distribution of two predators and their prey in an iron rich stream. Journal of Animal Ecology 45: 41-57.
20. Hutton, G. & L. Haller, 2004. Evaluation of the Costs and Benefits of Water and Sanitation Improvement on the Global Level. World Health Organization, Geneva.
21. Karr, J. R., 1991. Biological integrity: a long-neglected aspect of water resource management. Ecological Applications 1: 66-84.
22. Karr, J. R. & E. W. Chu, 1999. Restoring Life in Running Waters: Better Biological Monitoring. Island Press, Washington, DC: 200 pp.
23. Khanal, S. N. & O. Moog, 2003. Effect of stream poisoning disturbance on the benthic invertebrate fauna in a midhill stream in Nepal. Nepalese Journal of Science and Technology 5: 63-74.
24. Kolenati, F. A., 1848. Über Nutzen und Schaden der Trichopteren. Stettiner entomologische Zeitung 9.
25. Korte, T., A. B. M. Baki, T. Ofenböck, O. Moog, S. Sharma & D. Hering, 2010. Assessing river ecological quality with benthic macroinvertebrates in the Hindu Kush-Himalaya region. Hydrobiologia. doi: 10. 1007/s10750-010-0290-z.
26. Minshall, G. W. & J. N. Minshall, 1977. Microdistribution of benthic invertebrates in a Rocky Mountain stream. Hydrobiologia 55: 231-249.
27. Moog, O. & S. Sharma, 2005. Guidance for pre-classifying the ecological status of HKH rivers. Working paper within ASSESS-HKH: 26 pp [retrieved 9 September 2008 from http://www. assess-hkh. at/downloads/D10_Methodology. pdf].
28. Moog, O., A. Chovanec, H. Hinteregger & A. Römer, 1999. Richtlinie für die saprobiologische Gewässergütebeurteilung von Fließgewässern. Wasserwirtschaftskataster, Bundesmin isterium für Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Wien: 144 pp.
29. Moog, O., A. Schmidt-Kloiber, T. Ofenböck & J. Gerritsen, 2004. Does the ecoregion approach support the typological demands of the EU 'Water Framework Directive'? Hydrobiologia 516(1): 1-33.
30. Murray-Bligh, J., 1999. Procedures for Collecting and Analysing Macroinvertebrate Samples, Quality Management Systems for Environmental Monitoring. Biological Techniques, BT001. Environment Agency, Bristol, UK.
31. Nesemann, H. (ed.), S. Sharma, G. Sharma, S. N. Khanal, B. Pradhan, D. N. Shah & R. D. Tachamo, 2007. Aquatic Invertebrates of the Ganga River System (Mollusca, Annelida, Crustacea (in part)), Vol. 1: 263 pp. ISBN 978-99946-2-674-8.
32. Ofenböck, T., O. Moog, J. Gerritsen & M. T. Barbour, 2004. A stressor specific multimetric approach for monitoring running waters in Austria using benthic macro-invertebrates. Hydrobiologia 516: 251-268.
33. Ofenböck, T., O. Moog, A. Hartmann & I. Stubauer, 2008. Leitfaden zur Erhebung der biologischen Qualitätselemente, Teil A2 - Makrozoobenthos. Bundesministerium für Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Umwelt und Wasserwirtschaft, Wien: 215 pp [www. lebensministerium. at].
34. Olson, D. M., E. Dinerstein, E. D. Wikramanaya, N. D. Burgess, G. V. N. Powell, E. C. Underwood, J. A. D'Amico, I. I. Hollye, S. J. C. Morrison, C. J. Loucks, T. F. Allnutt, T. H. Ricketts, Y. Kura, J. F. Lamoreux, W. W. Wettengel, P. Hedao & K. R. Kassem, 2001. Terrestrial ecoregions of the world: a new map of life on earth. BioScience 51(11): 933-938 [http://www. panda. org].
35. Pittwell, L. R., 1976. Biological monitoring of rivers in the community, pp. 225-261. In Amavis, R. & J. Smeets (eds), Principles and Methods for Determining Ecological Criteria on Hydrobiocenoses. Pergamon Press, Oxford: 531 pp.
36. Pradhan, B., 1998. Water Quality Assessment of the Bagmati River and Its Tributaries, Kathmandu Valley, Nepal. PhD Thesis, Department of Hydrobiology, Institute of Water Provision, Water Ecology and Waste Management, BOKU - University, Vienna, Austria: 22-25, 43-52, 123-169.
37. Rosenberg, D. M. & A. P. Resh (eds), 1992. Freshwater Biomonitoring and Benthic Macroinvertebrates. Chapman and Hall, New York.
38. Sharma, S. 1996. Biological Assessment of Water Quality in the Rivers of Nepal. PhD Thesis, University of Agriculture, Forestry and Renewable Natural Resources at Vienna, Austria: 398 pp.
39. Sharma, S. & O. Moog, 1996. The applicability of biotic indices and scores in water quality assessment of Nepalese rivers. In Proceedings of the Ecohydrology Conference on High Mountain Areas, March 23-26, 1996, Kathmandu, Nepal: 641-657.
40. Sharma, S. & O. Moog, 2005. A reference based Nepalese biotic score and its application in the midland hills and lowland plains for river water quality assessment and management. In Tripathi, R. D., K. Kulshrestha, M. Agrawal, K. J. Ahmed, C. K. Varsehen, Fripa, Sagar, P. Pushpangadan (eds), Proceedings Entitled Plant Response to Environmental Stress. IBD, CO, Publisher, Lucknow.
41. Sládecék, V., 1973a. System of water quality from the biological point of view. Archiv für Hydrobiologie Beiheft 7: 1-218.
42. Slàdecèk, V., 1973b. The reality of three British biotic indices. Water Research 7: 995-1002.
43. Stubauer, I., O. Moog, D. Hering, T. Korte, A. Hoffmann, K. Brabec, S. Sharma, M. Shrestha, M. A. Kahlown, M. A. Tahir, A. Kumar, M. P. Sharma, M. F. Bari, A. B. M. Badruzzaman & G. K. Chhopel, this issue. The development of an assessment system to evaluate the ecological status of rivers in the Hindu Kush-Himalayan Region: introduction to the special feature. Hydrobiologia. doi: 10. 1007/s10750-010-0286-8.
44. Woodiwiss, F. S., 1964. The biological system of stream classification used by the Trent River Board. Chemistry and Industry 11: 443-447.