Influence of runoff regime type on a macroinvertebrate-based flow index in rivers of British Columbia (Canada)

Ecohydrology

Volumn 5, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 414-423

  Armanini, D G ^a,b   Monk, W A ^a   Tenenbaum, D E ^c   Peters, D L ^d   Baird, D J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW BRUNSWICK   (Canada)

^b Prothea srl   (Italy)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS BOSTON   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF VICTORIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Benthic invertebrate; Flow management; Hydrology; Rivers

Indexed keywords

ANTHROPOGENIC PRESSURES; BENTHIC INVERTEBRATES; BIOLOGICAL COMMUNITY; BIOLOGICAL SAMPLES; BIOMONITORING; BRITISH COLUMBIA; DATA ARCHIVES; DESCRIPTORS; ECOLOGICAL FLOWS; ECOLOGICAL QUALITY; FLOW INDICES; FLOW MANAGEMENT; HYDROLOGICAL CONDITION; HYDROLOGICAL STRUCTURE; MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY; MONITORING STATIONS; NUMBER OF SAMPLES; ON FLOW; RIVER SITES; RUNOFF REGIMES; SPATIAL MATCHING; UNIVARIATE;

ECOLOGY; HEALTH RISKS; HYDROLOGY; RUNOFF;

RIVERS;

BENTHOS; BIOMONITORING; COMMUNITY COMPOSITION; ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECT; HYDROLOGICAL REGIME; MACROINVERTEBRATE; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; RIVER FLOW; RUNOFF;

BRITISH COLUMBIA; CANADA;

INVERTEBRATA;

EID: 84858597758     PISSN: 19360584     EISSN: 19360592     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/eco.234     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Anderson MJ. 2001. A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Austral Ecology 26: 32-46.
2. Armanini DG, Horrigan N, Monk WA, Peters DL, Baird DJ. 2010. Development of a benthic macroinvertebrate flow sensitivity index for Canadian rivers. River Research and Applications. DOI: 10.1002/rra.1389.
3. Arthington AH, Bunn SE, Poff NL, Naiman RJ. 2006. The challenge of providing environmental flow rules to sustain river ecosystems. Ecological Applications 16: 1311-1318.
4. Bailey RC, Norris RH, Reynoldson TB. 2004. Bioassessment of Freshwater Ecosystems. Kluwer Academic Publishers: Norwell, MA.
5. Baird DJ, Peters DL, Curry RA, Horrigan N, Monk WA, Tenebaum DE. 2009. Establishing Standards and assessment criteria for instream flow needs in agricultural watersheds of Canada. National Agri-Environmental Standards Initiative Synthesis Report No. 15. Environment Canada: Gatineau.
6. Benyahya L, St. Hilaire A, Ouarda TBMJ, Nedushan B, Bobée B. 2007. Prediction of water temperature based on stochastic approaches. Case study of the Deschutes River (Oregon, U.S.A.). Journal of Environmental Engineering and Science 6: 437-448.
7. Berger WJH, Parker FL. 1970. Diversity of planktonic Foraminifera in deep sea sediments. Science 168: 1345-1347.
8. Bona F, Falasco E, Fenoglio S, Iorio L, Badino G. 2008. Response of macroinvertebrate and diatom communities to human-induced physical alteration in mountain streams. River Research and Applications 24: 1068-1081.
9. Buffagni A, Armanini DG, Erba S. 2009. Does the lentic-lotic character of rivers affect invertebrate metrics used in the assessment of ecological quality? Journal of Limnology 68: 92-105.
10. Carlisle DM, Wolock DM, Meador MR. 2010. Alteration of streamflow magnitudes and potential ecological consequences: a multiregional assessment. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment (online). DOI: 10.1890/100053.
11. Dufrene M, Legendre P. 1997. Species assemblages and indicator species: the need for a flexible asymmetrical approach. Ecological Monography 67: 345-366.
12. Dunbar MJ, Pedersen ML, Cadman D, Extence C, Waddingham J, Chadd R, Larsen SE. 2010. River discharge and local scale physical habitat influence macroinvertebrate LIFE scores. Freshwater Biology 55: 226-242.
13. Environment Canada, 2004. Threats to water availability in Canada. NWRI Scientific Assessment Report Series No 3 and ACSD Science Assessment Series No 1. National Water Research Institute: Burlington; 128.
14. Extence CA, Ferguson AJD. 1989. Aquatic invertebrate surveys as a water quality management tool in the Anglian Water region. Regulated Rivers: Research and Management 4: 139-146.
15. Fleming SW, Whitfield PH, Moore RD, Quilty EJ. 2007. Regime-dependent 1 streamflow sensitivities to Pacific climate modes cross the Georgia-Puget transboundary 2 ecoregion. Hydrological Processes 21: 3264-3287.
16. Fraser Basin Council. 2010. The Fraser: A Canadian Heritage River, 10 year monitoring report (1998-2008). British Columbia; 79. FRASER BASIN COUNCIL, Vancouver.
17. Frissell CA, Liss WJ, Warren CE, Hurley MD. 1986. A hierarchical framework for stream habitat classification: viewing streams in a watershed context. Environmental Management 10(2): 199-214.
18. Hajibabei M, Shokralla S, Zhou X, Singer G, Baird DJ. Environmental barcoding: a next-generation sequencing approach for biomonitoring applications using river benthos. PLoS ONE 6(4): e17497.
19. Hannah DM, Smith BPG, Gurnell AM, McGregor GR. 2000. An approach to hydrograph classification. Hydrological Processes 14(2): 317-338.
20. Harris NM, Gurnell AM, Hannah DM, Petts GE. 2000. Classification of river regimes: a context for hydroecology. Hydrological Processes 14(16-17): 2831-2848.
21. Harvey KD, Pilon PJ, Yuzyk TR. 1999. Canada's Reference Hydrometric Basin Network (RHBN) in Partnerships in Water Resources Management. Canadian Water Resources Association (CWRA)'s 51st Annual Conference, Halifax, Nova Scotia, June 1999.
22. Hering D, Moog O, Sandin L, Verdonschot PFM. 2004. Overview and application of the AQEM assessment system. Hydrobiologia 516: 1-20.
23. Hilsenhoff WL. 1988. Rapid field assessment of organic pollution with a family-level biotic index. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 7: 65-68.
24. Jenson SK, Domingue JO. 1988. Software tools to extract topographic structure from digital elevation data for geographic information system analysis. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 54(11): 1593-1600.
25. Lenat DR. 1983. Chironomid taxa richness: natural variation and use in pollution assessment. Freshwater Invertebrate Biology 2: 192-198.
26. McArdle BH, Anderson MJ. 2001. Fitting multivariate models to community data: a comment on distance-based redundancy analysis. Ecology 82: 290-297.
27. McCune B, Grace JB. 2002. Analysis of Ecological Communities. MjM Software: Gleneden Beach, OR; 304.
28. Menezes S, Baird DJ, Soares A. 2010. Beyond taxonomy: a review of macroinvertebrate trait-based community descriptors as tools for freshwater biomonitoring. Journal of Applied Ecology 47: 711-719.
29. Monk WA, Wood PJ, Hannah DM, Wilson DA, Extence CA, Chadd RP. 2006. Flow variability and macroinvertebrate community response within riverine systems in England and Wales. Rivers Research and Applications 19: 595-615.
30. Monk WA, Wood PJ, Hannah DM, Wilson DA. 2008. Instream ecological response to inter-annual variability in the hydrological regime for rivers in England and Wales. River Research and Applications 24: 988-1001.
31. Monk WA, Baird DJ, Curry RA, Glozier N, Peters DL. In Press. Ecosystem status and trends report: biodiversity in Canadian lakes and rivers. Canadian Biodiversity: Ecosystem Status and Trends 2010, Technical Thematic Report Series No. 20. Canadian Councils of Resource Ministers: Ottawa.
32. Monk WA, Peters DL, Baird DJ, Curry RA. Quantifying trends in indicator hydrological variables for regime-based groups of Canadian rivers. Hydrological Processes DOI: 10.1002/hyp.8137.
33. O'Callaghan JF, Mark DM. 1984. The extraction of drainage networks from digital elevation data. Computer Vision, Graphics and Image Processing 28: 323-344.
34. Oksanen J, Kindt R, Legendre P, O'Hara B, Simpson GL, Solymos P, Stevens MHH, Wagner H. 2009. Vegan: community ecology package. R package version 1.15-3. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package = vegan. Accessed 31 April 2010.
35. Omernik JM. 1987. Ecoregions of the conterminous United States. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 77((1)): 118-125.
36. Peters DL, Baird DJ, Tenenbaum DE. 2007. Towards the development of instream flow needs standards for agricultural watersheds in Canada-2006/07 interim report. National Agri-Environmental Standards Initiative Technical Series Report No. 3-40. Environment Canada: Gatineau; 89.
37. Pielou EC. 1966. The measurement of diversity in different types of biological collections. Journal of Theoretical Biology 13: 131-144.
38. Poff NL, Richter B, Arthington AH, Bunn SE, Naiman RJ, Kendy E, Acreman M, Apse C, Bledsoe BP, Freeman M, Henriksen J, Jacobson RB, Kennen J, Merritt DM, O'Keefe J, Olden J, Rogers K, Tharme RE, Warner A. 2010. The Ecological Limits of Hydrologic Alteration (ELOHA): a new framework for developing regional environmental flow standards. Freshwater Biology 55: 147-170.
39. R Development Core Team. 2009. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, http://www.R-project.org. Accessed 31 April 2010.
40. Resh VH. 2008. Which group is best? Attributes of different biological assemblages used in freshwater biomonitoring programs. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 138: 131-138.
41. Reynoldson TB, Rosenberg DM, Resh VH. 2001. Comparison of models predicting invertebrate assemblages for biomonitoring in the Fraser River catchment, British Columbia. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 58: 1395-1410.
42. Reynoldson TB, Logan C, Pascoe T, Thompson SP. 2007. CABIN Canadian Aquatic Biomonitoring Network invertebrate biomonitoring field and laboratory manual. Canada National Water Research Institute, Environment Canada: Burlington, ON., Canada; http://cabin.cciw.ca/Application/Downloads/cabin_protocol.doc (retrieved 18 December 2009).
43. Richter BD, Baumgartner JV, Powell J, Braun DP. 1996. A method for assessing 6 hydrologic alteration within ecosystems. Conservation Biology 10: 1163-1174.
44. Shannon CE, Weaver W. 1949. The Mathematical Theory of Communication. The University of Illinois Press: Urbana, IL.
45. Snelder TH, Cattanéo F, Suren AM, Biggs BJF. 2004. Is the river environment classification an improved landscape-scale classification of rivers?. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 23: 580-598.
46. SPSS Inc. 2007. SPSS for Windows, Version 16. SPSS Inc: Chicago, IL.
47. StatSoft Inc. 2007. STATISTICA for Windows [Computer program manual]. StatSoft, Inc.: Tulsa, OK.
48. Van Sickle J. 1997. Using mean similarity dendrograms to evaluate classifications. Journal of Agricultural Biology and the Environmental Science 2: 370-388.
49. Van Sickle J, Huff DD, Hawkins CP. 2006. Selecting discriminant function models for predicting the expected richness of aquatic macroinvertebrates. Freshwater Biology 51: 359-372.
50. Water Survey of Canada. 2010. HYDAT-Surface Water and Sediment Data. Environment Canada: Ottawa, Canada.
51. Woo MK, Thorne R, Szeto K, Yang D. 2008. Streamflow hydrology in the boreal 21 region under the influences of climate and human interference. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences 363: 2251-2260.
52. WWF, 2009. Canada's rivers at risk. WWF-Canada report, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 17.