A Kick in the Headwaters: Evaluating a Macroinvertebrate Sampling Method for Ecological Condition Monitoring in Small Streams

Small streams dominate river networks and collectively support high biodiversity, but are rarely included in regulatory biomonitoring programmes. Macroinvertebrate communities are effective biomonitors of ecological condition and are routinely collected using 3‐min ‘kick’ samples. However, this 3‐mi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:River research and applications 2024-12
Hauptverfasser: Stubbington, Rachel, Longstaffe, Oliver, Sarremejane, Romain, Bates, Phillipa, Gething, Kieran J., Jones, J. Iwan, Kelly‐Quinn, Mary, Laini, Alex, Murray‐Bligh, John, Rippon, Lesley, Rouen, Simon
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page
container_title River research and applications
container_volume
creator Stubbington, Rachel
Longstaffe, Oliver
Sarremejane, Romain
Bates, Phillipa
Gething, Kieran J.
Jones, J. Iwan
Kelly‐Quinn, Mary
Laini, Alex
Murray‐Bligh, John
Rippon, Lesley
Rouen, Simon
description Small streams dominate river networks and collectively support high biodiversity, but are rarely included in regulatory biomonitoring programmes. Macroinvertebrate communities are effective biomonitors of ecological condition and are routinely collected using 3‐min ‘kick’ samples. However, this 3‐min duration may not be suitable for small streams, which typically support fewer taxa at lower densities than larger rivers of equivalent condition. We evaluated the kick‐sampling method at 30 sites representing a national small stream monitoring network. At each site, we collected three 5‐min kick samples in 10 0.5‐min component parts. We used the families collected in 15 min to represent ‘total’ site‐scale taxonomic richness, then determined the duration needed to sample ≥ 65% of these taxa (a method and target comparable to those used in larger rivers). We also determined the sampling duration at which an average score per taxon (ASPT) biomonitoring index stabilized. Considering all streams, on average, 2.5‐min durations captured ≥ 65% of taxa, but 3.5 min was required to reach this target in temporary streams, because numerous taxa occurred at low abundance. Only 54% of samples contained ≥ 65% of taxa after 2.5 min, compared to 70% after 3 min. In most streams, the ASPT stabilized after 2 min, whereas 3 min was required to meet this target in temporary streams. Considering the variation around any estimate of capture rates introduced by natural variability, taxonomic resolution and operator error, we suggest 3 min as the most robust sampling duration to enable condition monitoring in individual small streams and comparison with larger rivers.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/rra.4405
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>crossref</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1002_rra_4405</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>10_1002_rra_4405</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c152t-2c3cd20df0212825514a0f9a13e111b1d1310437beb6707f52edf7b9a87c0f133</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kMFOwzAQRC0EEqUg8Qk-cknx2nGTcKuqQhGNOBTO0caxW0MSV7Yp4sC_kwjEaUaa0az2EXINbAaM8VvvcZamTJ6QCUghE0jn2em_l8U5uQjhjTHI8iKfkO8FfbLqndqexr2ma43NJ0btwx1dHbH9wGj7HUVaovLO9kfto6790KBb7A7tGJY67l1DjfN0pVzrdlZhS5eub2y0rqel6210fqwOV7Ydti3dRq-xC5fkzGAb9NWfTsnr_epluU42zw-Py8UmUSB5TLgSquGsMYwDz7mUkCIzBYLQAFBDAwJYKrJa1_OMZUZy3ZisLjDPFDMgxJTc_O4OT4TgtakO3nbovypg1YitGrBVIzbxA2FdYVI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>A Kick in the Headwaters: Evaluating a Macroinvertebrate Sampling Method for Ecological Condition Monitoring in Small Streams</title><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><creator>Stubbington, Rachel ; Longstaffe, Oliver ; Sarremejane, Romain ; Bates, Phillipa ; Gething, Kieran J. ; Jones, J. Iwan ; Kelly‐Quinn, Mary ; Laini, Alex ; Murray‐Bligh, John ; Rippon, Lesley ; Rouen, Simon</creator><creatorcontrib>Stubbington, Rachel ; Longstaffe, Oliver ; Sarremejane, Romain ; Bates, Phillipa ; Gething, Kieran J. ; Jones, J. Iwan ; Kelly‐Quinn, Mary ; Laini, Alex ; Murray‐Bligh, John ; Rippon, Lesley ; Rouen, Simon</creatorcontrib><description>Small streams dominate river networks and collectively support high biodiversity, but are rarely included in regulatory biomonitoring programmes. Macroinvertebrate communities are effective biomonitors of ecological condition and are routinely collected using 3‐min ‘kick’ samples. However, this 3‐min duration may not be suitable for small streams, which typically support fewer taxa at lower densities than larger rivers of equivalent condition. We evaluated the kick‐sampling method at 30 sites representing a national small stream monitoring network. At each site, we collected three 5‐min kick samples in 10 0.5‐min component parts. We used the families collected in 15 min to represent ‘total’ site‐scale taxonomic richness, then determined the duration needed to sample ≥ 65% of these taxa (a method and target comparable to those used in larger rivers). We also determined the sampling duration at which an average score per taxon (ASPT) biomonitoring index stabilized. Considering all streams, on average, 2.5‐min durations captured ≥ 65% of taxa, but 3.5 min was required to reach this target in temporary streams, because numerous taxa occurred at low abundance. Only 54% of samples contained ≥ 65% of taxa after 2.5 min, compared to 70% after 3 min. In most streams, the ASPT stabilized after 2 min, whereas 3 min was required to meet this target in temporary streams. Considering the variation around any estimate of capture rates introduced by natural variability, taxonomic resolution and operator error, we suggest 3 min as the most robust sampling duration to enable condition monitoring in individual small streams and comparison with larger rivers.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1535-1459</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1535-1467</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/rra.4405</identifier><language>eng</language><ispartof>River research and applications, 2024-12</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c152t-2c3cd20df0212825514a0f9a13e111b1d1310437beb6707f52edf7b9a87c0f133</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-8475-5109</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27922,27923</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Stubbington, Rachel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Longstaffe, Oliver</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sarremejane, Romain</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bates, Phillipa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gething, Kieran J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jones, J. Iwan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kelly‐Quinn, Mary</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Laini, Alex</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Murray‐Bligh, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rippon, Lesley</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rouen, Simon</creatorcontrib><title>A Kick in the Headwaters: Evaluating a Macroinvertebrate Sampling Method for Ecological Condition Monitoring in Small Streams</title><title>River research and applications</title><description>Small streams dominate river networks and collectively support high biodiversity, but are rarely included in regulatory biomonitoring programmes. Macroinvertebrate communities are effective biomonitors of ecological condition and are routinely collected using 3‐min ‘kick’ samples. However, this 3‐min duration may not be suitable for small streams, which typically support fewer taxa at lower densities than larger rivers of equivalent condition. We evaluated the kick‐sampling method at 30 sites representing a national small stream monitoring network. At each site, we collected three 5‐min kick samples in 10 0.5‐min component parts. We used the families collected in 15 min to represent ‘total’ site‐scale taxonomic richness, then determined the duration needed to sample ≥ 65% of these taxa (a method and target comparable to those used in larger rivers). We also determined the sampling duration at which an average score per taxon (ASPT) biomonitoring index stabilized. Considering all streams, on average, 2.5‐min durations captured ≥ 65% of taxa, but 3.5 min was required to reach this target in temporary streams, because numerous taxa occurred at low abundance. Only 54% of samples contained ≥ 65% of taxa after 2.5 min, compared to 70% after 3 min. In most streams, the ASPT stabilized after 2 min, whereas 3 min was required to meet this target in temporary streams. Considering the variation around any estimate of capture rates introduced by natural variability, taxonomic resolution and operator error, we suggest 3 min as the most robust sampling duration to enable condition monitoring in individual small streams and comparison with larger rivers.</description><issn>1535-1459</issn><issn>1535-1467</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNo9kMFOwzAQRC0EEqUg8Qk-cknx2nGTcKuqQhGNOBTO0caxW0MSV7Yp4sC_kwjEaUaa0az2EXINbAaM8VvvcZamTJ6QCUghE0jn2em_l8U5uQjhjTHI8iKfkO8FfbLqndqexr2ma43NJ0btwx1dHbH9wGj7HUVaovLO9kfto6790KBb7A7tGJY67l1DjfN0pVzrdlZhS5eub2y0rqel6210fqwOV7Ydti3dRq-xC5fkzGAb9NWfTsnr_epluU42zw-Py8UmUSB5TLgSquGsMYwDz7mUkCIzBYLQAFBDAwJYKrJa1_OMZUZy3ZisLjDPFDMgxJTc_O4OT4TgtakO3nbovypg1YitGrBVIzbxA2FdYVI</recordid><startdate>20241210</startdate><enddate>20241210</enddate><creator>Stubbington, Rachel</creator><creator>Longstaffe, Oliver</creator><creator>Sarremejane, Romain</creator><creator>Bates, Phillipa</creator><creator>Gething, Kieran J.</creator><creator>Jones, J. Iwan</creator><creator>Kelly‐Quinn, Mary</creator><creator>Laini, Alex</creator><creator>Murray‐Bligh, John</creator><creator>Rippon, Lesley</creator><creator>Rouen, Simon</creator><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8475-5109</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20241210</creationdate><title>A Kick in the Headwaters: Evaluating a Macroinvertebrate Sampling Method for Ecological Condition Monitoring in Small Streams</title><author>Stubbington, Rachel ; Longstaffe, Oliver ; Sarremejane, Romain ; Bates, Phillipa ; Gething, Kieran J. ; Jones, J. Iwan ; Kelly‐Quinn, Mary ; Laini, Alex ; Murray‐Bligh, John ; Rippon, Lesley ; Rouen, Simon</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c152t-2c3cd20df0212825514a0f9a13e111b1d1310437beb6707f52edf7b9a87c0f133</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Stubbington, Rachel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Longstaffe, Oliver</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sarremejane, Romain</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bates, Phillipa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gething, Kieran J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jones, J. Iwan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kelly‐Quinn, Mary</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Laini, Alex</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Murray‐Bligh, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rippon, Lesley</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rouen, Simon</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>River research and applications</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Stubbington, Rachel</au><au>Longstaffe, Oliver</au><au>Sarremejane, Romain</au><au>Bates, Phillipa</au><au>Gething, Kieran J.</au><au>Jones, J. Iwan</au><au>Kelly‐Quinn, Mary</au><au>Laini, Alex</au><au>Murray‐Bligh, John</au><au>Rippon, Lesley</au><au>Rouen, Simon</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A Kick in the Headwaters: Evaluating a Macroinvertebrate Sampling Method for Ecological Condition Monitoring in Small Streams</atitle><jtitle>River research and applications</jtitle><date>2024-12-10</date><risdate>2024</risdate><issn>1535-1459</issn><eissn>1535-1467</eissn><abstract>Small streams dominate river networks and collectively support high biodiversity, but are rarely included in regulatory biomonitoring programmes. Macroinvertebrate communities are effective biomonitors of ecological condition and are routinely collected using 3‐min ‘kick’ samples. However, this 3‐min duration may not be suitable for small streams, which typically support fewer taxa at lower densities than larger rivers of equivalent condition. We evaluated the kick‐sampling method at 30 sites representing a national small stream monitoring network. At each site, we collected three 5‐min kick samples in 10 0.5‐min component parts. We used the families collected in 15 min to represent ‘total’ site‐scale taxonomic richness, then determined the duration needed to sample ≥ 65% of these taxa (a method and target comparable to those used in larger rivers). We also determined the sampling duration at which an average score per taxon (ASPT) biomonitoring index stabilized. Considering all streams, on average, 2.5‐min durations captured ≥ 65% of taxa, but 3.5 min was required to reach this target in temporary streams, because numerous taxa occurred at low abundance. Only 54% of samples contained ≥ 65% of taxa after 2.5 min, compared to 70% after 3 min. In most streams, the ASPT stabilized after 2 min, whereas 3 min was required to meet this target in temporary streams. Considering the variation around any estimate of capture rates introduced by natural variability, taxonomic resolution and operator error, we suggest 3 min as the most robust sampling duration to enable condition monitoring in individual small streams and comparison with larger rivers.</abstract><doi>10.1002/rra.4405</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8475-5109</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1535-1459
ispartof River research and applications, 2024-12
issn 1535-1459
1535-1467
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1002_rra_4405
source Wiley Online Library All Journals
title A Kick in the Headwaters: Evaluating a Macroinvertebrate Sampling Method for Ecological Condition Monitoring in Small Streams
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-09T16%3A59%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-crossref&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20Kick%20in%20the%20Headwaters:%20Evaluating%20a%20Macroinvertebrate%20Sampling%20Method%20for%20Ecological%20Condition%20Monitoring%20in%20Small%20Streams&rft.jtitle=River%20research%20and%20applications&rft.au=Stubbington,%20Rachel&rft.date=2024-12-10&rft.issn=1535-1459&rft.eissn=1535-1467&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/rra.4405&rft_dat=%3Ccrossref%3E10_1002_rra_4405%3C/crossref%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true