Measurement by in situ bioassay of water quality in an agricultural catchment
References (39)
- et al.
The performance of a new biological water quality score system based on macroinvertebrates over a wide range of unpolluted running water sites
Wat. Res.
(1983) - et al.
Elevation of glutathione-S-transferase activity as a stress response to organochlorine compounds in the freshwater mussel Sphaerium corneum
Mar. Envir. Res.
(1988) - et al.
Assays for differentiation of glutathione-S-transferases
Meth. Enzymol.
(1981) - et al.
Biotransformation and other physiological responses in rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri Richardson) caged in a lake receiving effluents of pulp and paper industry
Aquat. Toxicol.
(1990) - et al.
Responses of Gammarus pulex (Amphipoda, Crustacea) to metalliferous effluents: identification of toxic components and the importance of interpopulation variation
Envir. Pollut.
(1994) - et al.
Field deployment of a scope for growth assay involving Gammarus pulex, a freshwater benthic invertebrate
Ecotoxicol. Envir. Safety
(1990) - et al.
Lethal and sublethal toxicity of field simulated farm waste episodes to several freshwater invertebrate species
Wat. Res.
(1991) Biological water quality assessment of running waters based on macroinvertebrate communities: history and present status in Europe
Envir. Pollut.
(1989)- et al.
Impact of farm waste on freshwater invertebrate abundance and the feeding rate of G. pulex L.
Chemosphere
(1992) Standard Guide for Conducting Sediment Toxicity Tests with Freshwater Invertebrates
(1993)
River Water Quality
Assessing the toxicity of freshwater sediments
Envir. Toxicol. Chem.
The myth of the most sensitive species
Bioscience
Improving environmental protection
Estimating ecotoxicological risk and impact using indigenous aquatic microbial communities
Hydrobiologia
Problems associated with selecting the most sensitive species for toxicity testing
Hydrobiologia
The lethal and sublethal responses of Gammarus pulex to stress: sensitivity and sources of variation in an in situ bioassay
Envir. Toxicol. Chem.
The role of mesocosm studies in pesticide registration
Sediment interstitial water toxicity evaluations using Daphnia magna
Cited by (45)
Challenges to water quality assessment in Europe – Is there scope for improvement of the current Water Framework Directive bioassessment scheme in rivers?
2021, Ecological IndicatorsCitation Excerpt :Feeding is amongst the most relevant behaviours responding to environmental pressure, configuring an integrated endpoint that concomitantly reflects impairment of ecosystem trophic functioning (Agostinho et al., 2012; Forrow and Maltby, 2000; McLoughlin et al., 2000; Wallace and Webster, 1996). Validated protocols are available both for benthic organisms (e.g. Agostinho et al., 2012; Castro et al., 2018; Crane et al., 1995; Maltby et al., 2002; Satapornvanit et al., 2009; Vidal et al., 2019) and for organisms standing primarily in the water column (e.g. Castro et al., 2004; Vidal et al., 2019). Interestingly, combinations between feeding inhibition and biomarkers have been used successfully to assess the effects of chemical stressors in freshwater ecosystems (see e.g. Castro et al., 2004).
Small Water Bodies in Great Britain and Ireland: Ecosystem function, human-generated degradation, and options for restorative action
2018, Science of the Total EnvironmentCitation Excerpt :Direct entry of pesticide via spray drift can cause short-lived peaks in concentrations in SWBs (Maltby and Hills, 2008), and point sources such as from farmyards following sprayer mixing and cleaning activities can be significant contributors to total contamination (Mason et al., 1999). A small number of studies have used in situ bioassays to assess ecological impacts of pesticides in streams under field conditions (Crane et al., 1995; Matthiessen et al., 1995; Thomas et al., 2001). Recently, bioindicators have been applied to isolate the impacts of pesticides from those of other stressors in agricultural landscapes such as dredging, sediment, nutrients and changes in riparian vegetation.
Ecology-based evaluation of groundwater ecosystems under intensive agriculture: A combination of community analysis and sentinel exposure
2018, Science of the Total EnvironmentCitation Excerpt :For groundwater ecosystems, Marmonier et al. (2013) proposed to distinguish the use of stygobionts, which may be resistant to long-term exposure (one month of starvation) and allow assessing diffuse pollution or providing a comprehensive evaluation of groundwater ecological quality, from the use of epigean species, which may resist to short-term exposure only (one week) allowing assessment of acute toxicity disturbances. Several health criteria have been used to evaluate the degree of environmental disturbance resulting from exposure: (1) survival rate (Brown, 1980; Gust et al., 2010), (2) feeding activity (Coulaud et al., 2011; Crane et al., 1995; Forrow and Maltby, 2000), (3) physiological parameters (e.g., respiration, Gerhardt, 1996; vitellogenesis, Xuereb et al., 2011) and (4) life-history traits (e.g., reproduction, Gust et al., 2011; Schmitt et al., 2010). To estimate sentinel health after exposure in a synthetic way, Marmonier et al. (2013) proposed to use an index that combines survival rates and changes in energetic stores.
The use of crustaceans as sentinel organisms to evaluate groundwater ecological quality
2013, Ecological EngineeringIn situ feeding assay with Gammarus fossarum (Crustacea): Modelling the influence of confounding factors to improve water quality biomonitoring
2011, Water ResearchCitation Excerpt :FR measurement in gammarids can be affected by many biotic and abiotic factors. Biotic factors include source population (Maltby and Crane, 1994; Veerasingham and Crane, 1992; Crane et al., 1995), parasite load (McCahon et al., 1988; Pascoe et al., 1995; Fielding et al., 2003; Lettini and Sukhdeo, 2010), or body size (Nilsson, 1974). With the aim to reduce the variability related to these biotic factors, the use of transplanted standard organisms is proposed for water quality assessment (Liber et al., 2007) because it allows to play down the impact of biotic factors (one population source, same physiological parameters such as size, sex, reproductive and energetic status).