The AQEM Multimetric System for the Southern Italian Apennines: Assessing the Impact of Water Quality and Habitat Degradation on Pool Macroinvertebrates in Mediterranean Rivers

Buffagni, Andrea; Erba, Stefania; Cazzola, Marcello; Kemp, Joanna Lynn

doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0993-5_19

Cited by 40 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…All the metrics were normalized according to the maximum value reached in the reference sites of each country in order to compare the results between countries (Buffagni et al, 2005). The metrics selected for the analysis are among those most commonly included in the general assessment systems recently developed within the AQEM project (e.g., Buffagni et al, 2004b;Lorenz et al, 2004;Ofenbo¨ck et al, 2004;Pinto et al, 2004) also including a simple multimetric index specifically developed for European Inter-calibration purposes (ICMi: Buffagni et al, 2005). The biological metrics used in all the different stream types are reported in Table 3.…”

Section: Methods and Data Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Preliminary testing of River Habitat Survey features for the aims of the WFD hydro-morphological assessment: an overview from the STAR Project

Erba

Buffagni

Holmes³

et al. 2006

Hydrobiologia

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The UK River Habitat Survey (RHS) method for the assessment of hydro-morphological features was applied within the EU STAR project simultaneously with the collection of biological data. A subset of data from 79 sites affected by hydro-morphological alteration and belonging to 7 different stream types was analysed. The different features recorded within RHS were evaluated separately considering the characteristics associated with banks, channel and riparian zone. Different scores were assigned to selected features representing hydro-morphological alteration and naturalness of habitat. The ability of the different compartments to represent the quality gradient of sites was investigated. In addition, the link between macroinvertebrate community and hydro-morphological data was investigated, directly relating indices and metrics calculated from taxa list collected in a site to scores assigned to the RHS features. The sections highly affected by morphological alteration were channel geometry and bank profile. Metrics showing the best correlation with the features selected were EPT taxa, ASPT and ICMi (Inter-calibration Common Metric index). Among the indices studied, the HQA score (Habitat Quality Assessment) apparently played the most important role in structuring biological communities and the lentic-lotic character of rivers was also important.

show abstract

Section: Methods and Data Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Preliminary testing of River Habitat Survey features for the aims of the WFD hydro-morphological assessment: an overview from the STAR Project

Erba

Buffagni

Holmes³

et al. 2006

Hydrobiologia

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, benthic diatoms have been used for assessing the effects of acidification and eutrophication (e.g., Battarbee et al, 1997;Coring, 1999), macrophytes and fish are considered as reliable indicators of alterations to flow and habitat quality (e.g., Gorman & Karr, 1978;Bain et al, 1988;Tremp & Kohler, 1995), and benthic invertebrates are commonly used for monitoring the effects of organic pollution, acidification and alterations in hydromorphology (e.g., Armitage et al, 1983;Buffagni et al, 2004;Sandin et al, 2004). Although different organisms and metrics are frequently used in the assessment of aquatic ecosystems, the decision of what organism group(s)/metric(s) is probably based more on local taxonomic expertise than knowledge of discriminatory power or precision for the stressor of interest.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection of ecological change using multiple organism groups: metrics and uncertainty

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A number of biological approaches are commonly used to assess the ecological integrity of stream ecosystems. Recently, it is becoming increasingly common to use multiple organism groups in bioassessment. Advocates of the multiple organism approach argue that the use of different organism groups should strengthen inference-based models and ultimately result in lower assessment error, while opponents argue that organism groups often respond similarly to stress implying a high degree of redundancy. Using fish, macroinvertebrate, macrophyte and benthic diatom data, site-specific parameters (e.g., water chemistry and substratum) and catchment variables from European mountain (n=77) and lowland (n=85) streams we evaluated the discriminatory power and uncertainty associated with the use of a number of biological metrics commonly used in stream assessment. The primary environmental gradient for both streams types was land use and nutrient enrichment. Secondary and tertiary gradients were related to habitat quality or alterations in hydromorphology. Benthic diatom and macroinvertebrate metrics showed high discriminatory power (R 2 values often >0.50) and low error (<30%) with the primary (nutrient) gradient, while both fish and macrophyte metrics performed relatively poorly. Conversely, both fish and macrophyte metrics showed higher response (high coefficients of determination) than either benthic diatom or macroinvertebrate metrics to the second (e.g., alteration in habitat/hydromorphology) gradient. However, the discriminatory power and error associated with individual metrics varied markedly, indicating that caution should be exercised when selecting the 'best' organism group or metric to monitor stress.

show abstract

“…Metrics fulfilling this criterion are, in principal, suited to assessing the degradation of the freshwater ecosystem type and can be selected as candidate metrics. There are numerous examples in the literature for the process of selecting candidate metrics (Vlek et al, 2004;Bo¨hmer et al, 2004b;Ofenbo¨ck et al, 2004;Buffagni et al, 2004). Three examples on how metrics relate to different stress gradients are given in Figure 3.…”

Section: Selection Of Candidate Metricsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Numerous papers describe the possible approaches to metric selection (e.g. Holland, 1990;Barbour et al, 1992;Karr & Kerans,1992;Barbour et al, 1999;Karr & Chu, 1999;Buffagni et al, 2004;Hering et al, 2004b;Ofenbo¨ck et al, 2004;Vlek et al, 2004). Based on existing knowledge and literature information, the candidate metrics are selected on the basis of knowledge of the aquatic biota within a geographical entity, e.g.…”

Section: Selection Of Candidate Metricsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cook book for the development of a Multimetric Index for biological condition of aquatic ecosystems: Experiences from the European AQEM and STAR projects and related initiatives

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The requirements of the European Water Framework Directive (WFD), aimed at an integrative assessment methodology for evaluating the ecological status of water bodies are frequently being achieved through multimetric techniques, i.e. by combining several indices, which address different stressors or different components of the biocoenosis. This document suggests a normative methodology for the development and application of Multimetric Indices as a tool with which to evaluate the ecological status of running waters. The methodology has been derived from and tested on a European scale within the framework of the AQEM and STAR research projects, and projects on the implementation of the WFD in Austria and Germany. We suggest a procedure for the development of Multimetric Indices, which is composed of the following steps: (1) selection of the most suitable form of a Multimetric Index; (2) metric selection, broken down into metric calculation, exclusion of numerically unsuitable metrics, definition of a stressor gradient, correlation of stressor gradients and metrics, selection of candidate metrics, selection of core metrics, distribution of metrics within the metric types, definition of upper and lower anchors and scaling; (3) generation of a Multimetric Index (general or stressor-specific approach); (4) setting class boundaries; (5) interpretation of results. Each step is described by examples.

show abstract

The AQEM Multimetric System for the Southern Italian Apennines: Assessing the Impact of Water Quality and Habitat Degradation on Pool Macroinvertebrates in Mediterranean Rivers

Cited by 40 publications

References 26 publications

Preliminary testing of River Habitat Survey features for the aims of the WFD hydro-morphological assessment: an overview from the STAR Project

Preliminary testing of River Habitat Survey features for the aims of the WFD hydro-morphological assessment: an overview from the STAR Project

Detection of ecological change using multiple organism groups: metrics and uncertainty

Cook book for the development of a Multimetric Index for biological condition of aquatic ecosystems: Experiences from the European AQEM and STAR projects and related initiatives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About