Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://www.arca.fiocruz.br/handle/icict/12149
Type
ArticleCopyright
Open access
Embargo date
2015-12-31
Collections
- IOC - Artigos de Periódicos [12488]
Metadata
Show full item record
STREAM BIOMONITORING USING MACROINVERTEBRATES AROUND THE GLOBE: A COMPARISON OF LARGE-SCALE PROGRAMS
Standardization
Biological assessment
Subsampling taxonomic resolution
River management
Author
Affilliation
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. Laboratório de Avaliação e Promoção da Saúde Ambiental. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.
U.S. Geological Survey. Reston, VA, USA.
Pusan National University. Department of Biological Sciences. Pusan, Republic of Korea.
University of New Brunswick. Department of Biology. Environment Canada and Canadian Rivers Institute. Fredericton, NB, Canada.
University of Canterbury. School of Biological Sciences. Christchurch, New Zealand.
Wageningen University and Research Centre. Department of Freshwater Ecology. Alterra. Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Charles Sturt University. School of Environmental Sciences. Thurgoona, Australia.
Environment Canada. Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Resource Quality Information Services. Department Water and Sanitation. Pretoria, South Africa.
Oregon State University. Amnis Opes Institute and Department of Fisheries and Wildlife. Corvallis, OR, USA.
U.S. Geological Survey. Reston, VA, USA.
Pusan National University. Department of Biological Sciences. Pusan, Republic of Korea.
University of New Brunswick. Department of Biology. Environment Canada and Canadian Rivers Institute. Fredericton, NB, Canada.
University of Canterbury. School of Biological Sciences. Christchurch, New Zealand.
Wageningen University and Research Centre. Department of Freshwater Ecology. Alterra. Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Charles Sturt University. School of Environmental Sciences. Thurgoona, Australia.
Environment Canada. Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Resource Quality Information Services. Department Water and Sanitation. Pretoria, South Africa.
Oregon State University. Amnis Opes Institute and Department of Fisheries and Wildlife. Corvallis, OR, USA.
Abstract
Water quality agencies and scientists are increasingly
adopting standardized sampling methodologies
because of the challenges associated with
interpreting data derived from dissimilar protocols.
Here, we compare 13 protocols for monitoring streams
from different regions and countries around the globe.
Despite the spatially diverse range of countries assessed,
many aspects of bioassessment structure and protocols
were similar, thereby providing evidence of key
characteristics that might be incorporated in a global
sampling methodology. Similarities were found regarding
sampler type, mesh size, sampling period, subsampling
methods, and taxonomic resolution. Consistent
field and laboratory methods are essential for merging
data sets collected by multiple institutions to enable
large-scale comparisons. We discuss the similarities
and differences among protocols and present current
trends and future recommendations for monitoring programs, especially for regions where large-scale protocols
do not yet exist. We summarize the current state
in one of these regions, Latin America, and comment on
the possible development path for these techniques in
this region. We conclude that several aspects of stream
biomonitoring need additional performance evaluation
(accuracy, precision, discriminatory power, relative
costs), particularly when comparing targeted habitat
(only the commonest habitat type) versus site-wide
sampling (multiple habitat types), appropriate levels of
sampling and processing effort, and standardized indicators
to resolve dissimilarities among biomonitoring
methods. Global issues such as climate change are creating
an environment where there is an increasing need
to have universally consistent data collection, processing
and storage to enable large-scale trend analysis.
Biomonitoring programs following standardized
methods could aid international data sharing and
interpretation.
Keywords
Biomonitoring protocolsStandardization
Biological assessment
Subsampling taxonomic resolution
River management
Share