Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Towards diagnostic biotic indices for river macroinvertebrates

  • Published:
Hydrobiologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The construction of biotic indices that use macroinvertebratesto assess pollution and other anthropogenic disturbances ofrivers and streams often requires that each taxon be assigned anumber indicating its level of sensitivity. A problem inconstructing such indices is that individual taxa may varyquite widely in sensivity, depending on the nature of theparticular disturbance. One possible means of overcoming thisproblem is to construct a suite of indices, each assembledusing sensitivity numbers targeted to a particular impact.

In order to test this idea, we sampled macroinvertebrates fromrivers in south-eastern Australia subjected to three differenttypes of anthropogenic disturbance: operation of large dams,discharge of effluent from municipal sewage treatment plants,and contamination by metals originating from historical mining.Using macroinvertebrate data from sampling sites with varyinglevels of exposure to disturbance, we developed sensitivitynumbers for macroinvertebrate families for individual riversand combinations of rivers with the same disturbance type.

Sensitivity numbers calculated for individual families differedsignificantly according to disturbance type in several cases.Gastropod molluscs (family Thiaridae) were tolerant of dameffects but sensitive to sewage and metals, whereascoenagrionid damselfly nymphs, elmid beetles and ostracods weremost tolerant of sewage. Corydalid alderfly larvae,leptophlebiid mayfly nymphs, lestid damselfly nymphs,libellulid dragonfly nymphs and scirtid beetle larvae weremost tolerant of metals. Indices constructed using sensitivitynumbers for a particular disturbance were generally mostresponsive to that disturbance, but there was considerablegenerality in responses as well as substantial variabilitybetween different rivers with the same disturbance type. Inparticular, macroinvertebrate communities at sites downstreamof dams responded quite variably, probably because ofsubstantial differences in release regimes. We conclude thatthe approach has merit but requires considerable furtherdevelopment and testing, as well as consideration of the levelsof specificity and diagnostic strength that are appropriate orachievable.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Armitage, P. D., R. J. M. Gunn, M. T. Furse, J. F. Wright & D. Moss, 1987. The use of prediction to assess macroinvertebrate response to river regulation. Hydrobiologia 144: 25–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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. Wat. Res. 17: 333–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arthington, A. H., D. L. Conrick, D. W. Connell & P. M. Outridge, 1982. The ecology of a polluted urban creek. Australian Water Resources Council Technical Paper No. 68. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barton, D. R. & J. L. Metcalfe-Smith, 1992. A comparison of sampling techniques and summary indices for assessment of water quality in the Yamaska River, Québec, based on benthic macroinvertebrates. Envir. Monit. Assess. 21: 225–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blühdorn, D. & A. Arthington, 1994. The effects of flow regulation in the Barker–Barambah catchment. Centre for Catchment and In-stream Research, Griffith University, Brisbane.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, M., 1993.Water quality and ecology of the Nattai River. Australian Water Technologies Science and Environment, Sydney, report No. 93/13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camargo, J. A., 1993. Macrobenthic surveys as a a valuable tool for assessing freshwater quality in the Iberian Peninsula. Envir. Monit. Assess. 24: 71–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, I. C., 1978. A biological investigation of an organically polluted urban stream in Victoria. Aust. J. mar. Freshwat. Res. 29: 275–291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cao, Y., A.W. Bark & W. P. Williams, 1996. Measuring the responses of macroinvertebrate communities to water pollution: a comparison of multivariate approaches, biotic and diversity indices. Hydrobiologia 341: 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cao, Y., A. W. Bark & W. P. Williams, 1997. Analysing benthic macroinvertebrate community changes along a pollution gradient: a framework for the development of biotic indices. Wat. Res. 31: 884–892.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castella, E., M. Bickerton, P. D. Armitage & G. E. Petts, 1995. The effects of water abstractions on invertebrate communities in U.K. streams. Hydrobiologia 308: 167–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, B. M., D. R. Jones & R. F. Jung, 1983. Processes controlling metal ion attenuation in acid mine drainage streams. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 47: 1957–1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, P. M., M.A. Farrel & R. O. Brinkhurst, 1982. Relative tolerances of selected aquatic oligochaetes to individual pollutants and environmental factors. Aquat. Toxicol. 2: 47–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chessman, B.C., 1995. Rapid assessment of rivers usingmacroinvertebrates: a procedure based on habitat-specific sampling, family-level identification and a biotic index. Aust. J. Ecol. 20: 122–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chessman, B. C. & D. P. Robinson, 1987. Some effects of the 1982–83 drought on water quality and macroinvertebrate fauna in the lower La Trobe River, Victoria. Aust. J. Mar. Freshwat. Res. 38: 289–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chessman, B. C., J. E. Growns & A. R. Kotlash, 1997. Objective derivation of macroinvertebrate family sensitivity grade numbers for the SIGNAL biotic index: application to the Hunter River System, New South Wales. Mar. Freshwat. Res. 48: 159–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chutter, M., 1994. The rapid biological assessment of stream and river water quality bymeans of the macroinvertebrate community in South Africa. In M. C. Uys (ed.), Classification of Rivers and Environmental Health Indicators. Proceedings of a Joint South African/Australian Workshop, February 7–14 1994, Cape Town, South Africa. Water Research Commission Report No. TT63/94.

  • Cosser, P. R., 1988. Macroinvertebrate community structure and chemistry of an organically polluted creek in south-east Queensland. Aust. J. mar Freshwat. Res. 39: 671–683.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dames & Moore Pty Ltd, 1993. Captains Flat mine site–assessment of options for further remediation for N.S.W. Environment Protection Authority–final report.

  • Davies, P. E., N. J. Mitchell & L. A. Barmusta, 1996. Mount Lyell revisited: acid mine drainage, macroinvertebrates and RIVPACS in the Queen and King river catchments. Australian Society for Limnology Inc. 35th Congress Abstracts and Programme, 48.

  • De Shon, J. E., 1995. Development and application of the Invertebrate Community Index (ICI). In W. S. Davis & T. P. Simon (eds), Biological Assessment and Criteria. Tools for Water Resource Planning and Decision Making. Lewis, Boca Raton: 217–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doeg, T. J., G. W. Davey & J. D. Blyth, 1987. Response of the aquatic macroinvertebrate communities to dam construction on the Thomson River, southeastern Australia. Reg. Rivers. Res. & Mgmt. 1: 195–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewell, W. S., J. W. Gorsuch, R. O. Kringle, K. A. Robillard & R. C. Spiegel, 1986. Simultaneous evaluation of the acute effects of chemicals on seven aquatic species. Envir. Tox. Chem. 5: 831–840.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gippel, C. J. & M. J. Stewardson, 1995. Development of an environmental flow management strategy for the Thomson River, Victoria, Australia. Reg. Rivers. Res. & Mgmt. 10: 121–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Growns, J. E., B. C. Chessman, J. E. Jackson & D. G. Ross, 1997. Rapid assessment of Australian rivers using macroinvertebrates: cost and efficiency of six methods of sample processing. J. North am. Benth. Soc. 16: 682–693.

    Google Scholar 

  • Growns, J. E., B. C. Chessman, P. K. McEvoy & I. A. Wright, 1995. Rapid assessment of rivers using macroinvertebrates: case studies in the Nepean River and Blue Mountains, NSW. Aust. J. Ecol. 20: 130–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannaford, M. J. & V. H. Resh, 1995. Variability in macroinvertebrate rapid-bioassessment surveys and habitat assessments in a northern California stream. J. North am. Benth. Soc. 14: 430–439.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkes, H. A., 1962. Biological aspects of river pollution. In L. Klein (ed.), River Pollution II. Causes and Effects. Butterworths, London: 311–432.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, M. O., 1973. Reciprocal averaging: an eigenvector method of ordination. J. Ecol. 61: 237–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilsenhoff, W. L., 1987. An improved biotic index of organic stream pollution. Great Lakes Ent. 20: 31–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilsenhoff, W. L., 1988. Rapid field assessment of organic pollution with a family-level biotic index. J. North am. Benth. Soc. 7: 65–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogg, I. D. & R. H. Norris, 1991. Effects of runoff from land clearing and urban development on the distribution and abundance of macroinvertebrates in pool areas of a river. Aust. J.mar. Freshwat. Res. 42: 507–518.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, J. R., B. H. Tracy, J. L. Sebaugh, D. H. Hazelwood & M. M. Smart, 1981. Biotic index tested for ability to assess water quality of Missouri Ozark streams. Trans. am. Fish. Soc. 110: 627–637.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lake, P. S., D. Coleman, B. Mills & R. Norris, 1977. A reconnaissance of pollution of the King River in the Comstock-Crotty area, west Tasmania. In M. R. Banks & T. B. Kirkpatrick (eds), Landscape and Man. Royal Society of Tasmania, Hobart: 157–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenat, D. R., 1993. A biotic index for the southeastern United States: derivation and list of tolerance values, with criteria for assigning water-quality ratings. J. North am. Benth. Soc. 12: 279–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackey, A. P., 1988. The biota of the River Dee (CentralQueensland, Australia) in relation to the effects of acid mine drainage. Proc. r. Soc. Qld. 99: 9–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchant R., P. Mitchell & R. Norris, 1984. Distribution of benthic invertebrates along a disturbed section of the La Trobe River, Victoria: an analysis based on numerical classification. Aust. J. mar Freshwat. Res. 35: 355–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchant, R., 1989. Changes in the benthic macroinvertebrate community of the Thomson River after dam construction. Reg. Rivers. Res. & Mgmt. 4: 71–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • McIvor, C. C., 1976. The effect of organic and nutrient enrichment on the benthic macroinvertebrate community of Moggill Creek, Queensland. Water 3: 16–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Napier, G. M., 1992. Application of laboratory-derived data to natural aquatic ecosystems. PhD thesis, Macquarie University.

  • Nicholas, W. L. & M. Thomas, 1978. Biological release and recycling of toxic metals from lake and river sediments. Australian Water Resources Council Technical Paper No. 33. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norris, R. H. 1986. Mine waste pollution of the Molonglo River, New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory: effectiveness of remedial works at Captains Flat mining area. Aust. J. mar. Freshwat. Res. 37: 147–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norris, R. H., P. S. Lake & R. Swain, 1982. Ecological effects of mine effluents on the South Esk River, north-eastern Tasmania III. Benthic macroinvertebrates. Aust. J. mar. Freshwat. Res. 33: 789–809.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson R. G. & L. K. Penridge, 1987. The effects of pollution by organic sugar mill effluent on the macro-invertebrates of a stream in tropical Queensland, Australia. J. Envir. Mgmt. 24: 205–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, N. & G. Moller, 1995. An ecological and physical assessment of the condition of streams in the upper Condamine River catchment. Department of Primary Industries, Queensland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinder, L. C. V. & I. S. Farr, 1987a. Biological surveillance of water quality–2. Temporal and spatial variation in the macroinvertebrate fauna of the River Frome, A Dorset chalk stream. Arch. Hydrobiol. 109: 321–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinder, L. C. V. & I. S. Farr, 1987b. Biological surveillance of water quality–3. The influence of organic enrichment on the macroinvertebrate fauna of small chalk streams. Arch. Hydrobiol. 109: 619–637.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resh, V. H. & J. K. Jackson, 1993. Rapid assessment approaches to biomonitoring using benthic macroinvertebrates. In D.M. Rosenberg & V. H. Resh (eds), Freshwater Biomonitoring and Benthic Macroinvertebrates. Chapman & Hall, New York: 195–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resh, V. H. & J. D. Unzicker, 1975. Water quality monitoring and aquatic organisms: the importance of species identification. J. Wat. Pollut. Cont. Fed. 47: 9–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, D., N. Maini & H. Cross, 1996. Environmental flow guidelines and recommendations for the enlarged Pindari Dam–draft report. Department of Land and Water Conservation, Sydney.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slooff, W., 1983. Benthic macroinvertebrates and water quality assessment: some toxicological considerations. Aquat. Toxicol. 4: 73–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stark, J. D., 1985. A macroinvertebrate community index of water quality for stony streams. Water & Soil Misc. Publ. 87: 1–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stark, J. D., 1993. Performance of the Macroinvertebrate Community Index: effects of sampling method, sample replication, water depth, current velocity, and substratum on index values. N. Z. J. mar. Freshwat. Res. 27: 463–478.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walley, W. J. & H. A. Hawkes, 1996. A computer-based reappraisal of the Biological Monitoring Working Party scores using data from the 1990 river quality survey of England and Wales. Wat. Res. 30: 2086–2094.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walley, W. J. & H. A. Hawkes, 1997. A computer-based development of the Biological Monitoring Working Party score system incorporating abundance rating, site type and indicator value. Wat. Res. 31: 201–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, J. A. L., A. H. Arthington & D. L. Conrick, 1982. Effect of sewage effluent on dragonflies (Odonata) of Bulimba Creek, Brisbane. Aust. J. mar. Freshwat. Res. 33: 517–528.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weatherly, A. H., J. R. Beevers & P. S. Lake, 1967. The ecology of a zinc-polluted river. In A. H. Weatherly (ed.), Australian Inland Waters and their Fauna. Australian National University Press, Canberra: 252–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoder, C. O. & E. T. Rankin, 1995. Biological response signatures and the area of degradation value: new tools for interpreting multimetric data. In W. S. Davis & T. P. Simon (eds), Biological Assessment and Criteria. Tools for Water Resource Planning and Decision Making. Lewis, Boca Raton: 263–286.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Bruce C. Chessman

    Present address: Department of Land and Water Conservation, P.O. Box 3720, Parramatta, N.S.W, 2124, Australia

  2. Paul K. McEvoy

    Present address: Australian Water Quality Centre, P.M.B. 3, Salisbury, S.A, 5108, Australia

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Australian Water Technologies, P.O. Box 73, West Ryde, N.S.W, 2114, Australia

    Bruce C. Chessman & Paul K. McEvoy

Authors
  1. Bruce C. Chessman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paul K. McEvoy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chessman, B.C., McEvoy, P.K. Towards diagnostic biotic indices for river macroinvertebrates. Hydrobiologia 364, 169–182 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003142819625

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003142819625

Search

Navigation