Relationship between benthic macroinvertebrate bio-indices and physicochemical parameters of water: a tool for water resources managers

Journal of Environmental Health Science Engineering

Banafsheh Zahraie²  Nematollah Jaafarzadeh³  Hamed Yazdian¹ 

[1] School of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran;Center of Excellence for Infrastructure Engineering and Management, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran;Environmental Technology Research Center, Ahvaz Jondishapur University of Medical Science, Ahvaz, Iran

关键词: Margalef index;    Genetic programming;    Physicochemical parameter;    Bio-diversity index;   

Others  :  810482
DOI  :  10.1186/2052-336X-12-30

 received in 2013-04-25, accepted in 2013-12-10,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

The ecosystem health of rivers downstream of dams is among the issues that has become focus of attention of many researchers particularly in the recent years. This paper aims to deal with the question, how the environmental health of a river ecosystem can be addressed in water resources planning and management studies. In this study, different parameters affecting the ecosystem of river-reservoir systems, as well as various biological components of river ecosystems have been studied and among them, benthic macro-invertebrates have been selected. Among various bio-indices, biodiversity indices have been selected as the evaluation tool. The case study of this research is Aboulabbas River in Khuzestan province in Iran. The relationship between the biodiversity indices and physicochemical parameters have been studied using correlation analysis, Principal Component Analysis (PCA), and Genetic Programming (GP). Margalef index was selected as the appropriate bio-index for the studied catchment area. The relationship found in this study for the first time between the Margalef bio-index and physicochemical parameters of water in the Aboulabbas River has proved to be a useful tool for water resources managers to assess the ecosystem status when only physicochemical properties of water are known.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Yazdian et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Czeniawska-Kusza I: Comparing modified biological monitoring working party score system and several biological indices based on macroinvertebrates for water quality assessment. Limnol 2005, 35:169-176.
• [2]Wetzel RG: Lake and river ecosystems. Third Edit: Limnology; 2002.
• [3]Jager HI, Brennant S: Sustainable reservoir operation: can we generate hydropower and preserve ecosystem values? River Res Appl 2008, 24:340-352.
• [4]YAP CK, RAHIM ISMAIL A, AZRINA MZ, ISMAIL A, TAN SG: The influential of physico-chemical parameters on the distributions of oligochateas (limnodrilus sp .) at the polluted downstream of the tropical Langat river, peninsular Malaysia. J Appl Sci Environ Mgt 2006, 10:135-140.
• [5]Azrina MZ, Yap CK, Ismail AR, Ismail A, Tan SG: Anthropogenic impacts on the distribution and biodiversity of benthic macroinvertebrates and water quality of the Langat River, Peninsular Malaysia. Ecotoxicol Environ l Saf 2006, 64:337-347.
• [6]Latha C, Thanga VSG: Macroinvertebrate diversity of veli and kadinamkulam lakes, South Kerala, Indiaa. J Environ Biol 2010, 547:543-547.
• [7]Kennen JG, Riva-murray K, Beaulieu KM: Determining hydrologic factors that influence stream macroinvertebrate assemblages in the northeastern US. Ecohydrol 2010, 106:88-106.
• [8]Nemati Varnosfaderany M, Ebrahimi E, Mirghaffary N, Safyanian A: Biological assessment of the zayandeh Rud river, Iran, using benthic macroinvertebrates. Limnol 2010, 40:226-232.
• [9]Monk WA, Wood PJ, Hannah M, Wilson DA: Short communication selection of river flow indices for the assessment of hydroecological change. River Res Appl 2007, 122:113-122.
• [10]Ogleni N, Topal B: Water quality assessment of the Mudurnu river, Turkey, using biotic indices. Water Resour Manage 2011, 25(11):2487-2508.
• [11]Karr JR: Rivers as sentile: using the biology of rivers to guide landscape management. Springer New york: Final report for USEPA; 1998:28.
• [12]Taylor BR, Bailey RC: Technical evaluation on methods for benthic invertebrate data analysis and interpretation, final report. AETE project 2.1.3. Ottawa: National Resources Canada, CANMET; 1997:26.
• [13]Rosenberg DM, Davies IJ, Cobb DG, Wiens AP: Protocols for measuring biodiversity: Benthic macroinvertebrates in fresh waters. Canada: Report for the Ecological Monitoring and Assessment Network (EMAN) Biodiversity Science Board (BSB); 1998:43.
• [14]Lliopoulou-Georgudaki J, Kantzatis V, Katharios P, Kaspiris T, Montesantou B: An application of different bioindicators for assessing water quality: a case study in the rivers alfeios and pineios. Ecol Indic 2003, 2:345-360.
• [15]Boulton AJ, Brock MA: Australian freshwater ecology. Processes and Management: Gleneagles Publishing; 1999.
• [16]EPA: Draft state environment protection policy (waters of Victoria). Melbourne: Environment Protection Authority Victoria; 2001.
• [17]ANZECC & ARMCANZ: Australian and New Zealand guidelines for fresh and marine water quality. National Water Quality ManagementStrategy Paper No 4. Canberra: Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council & Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand; 2000.
• [18]Wilsey B, Stirling G: Species richness and evenness respond in a different manner to propabule density in developing prairie microcosm communities. Plant Ecol 2007, 190:259-273.
• [19]Gallardo B, Gascón S, Quintana X, Comín FA: How to choose a biodiversity indicator? – redundancy and complementarity of biodiversity metrics in a freshwater ecosystem. Ecol Indic 2011, 11(5):1177-1184.
• [20]Pielou EC: Ecological diversity. New Jersey, USA: John Wiley & Sons Inc; 1975.
• [21]Pettersson M: Monitoring a freshwater fish population: statistical surveillance of biodiversity. Environ 1998, 9(2):139-150.
• [22]Kuo SR, Lin HJ, Shao KT: Seasonal changes in abundance and composition of the fish assemblage in Chiku Lagoon, southwestern Taiwan. Bull Mar Sci 2001, 68(1):85-99.
• [23]Koza J: Genetic programming: on the programming of computers by natural selection. Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA: The MIT Press; 1992.
• [24]Yang YCE, Cai X, Herricks EE: Identification of hydrologic indicators related to fish diversity and abundance: a data mining approach for fish community analysis. Water Resour Res 2008., 44W04412. doi:10.1029/2006WR005764
• [25]Sivapragasam C, Maheswaran R, Venkatesh V: Genetic programming approach for flood routing in natural channels. Hydrol Processes 2008, 628:623-628.
• [26]Rezapour OM, Shui LT, Dehghani AA: Review of genetic programing in water resource engineering 1. Sci 2010, 4(11):5663-5667.
• [27]Nasseri M, Zahraie B: Application of simple clustering on space-time mapping of mean monthly rainfall pattern. Int J Climatol 2011, 31(5):732-741.
• [28]Ouyang Y: Evaluation of river water quality monitoring stations by principal component analysis. Water Res 2005, 39(12):2621-2635.
• [29]Shrestha S, Kazama F: Assessment of surface water quality using multivariate statistical techniques: a case study of the Fuji river basin. Japan Environ Modell Softw 2007, 22:464-475.
• [30]Noori R, Karbassi AR, Sabahi MS: Evaluation of PCA and Gamma test techniques on ANN operation for weekly solid waste predicting. J Environ Manag 2010, 91(3):767-771.
• [31]Noori R, Karbassi A, Khakpour A, Mohammadi H, Badam K, Vesali- M: Chemometric analysis of surface water quality data: case study of the gorganrud river basin. Iran Environ Model Assess 2012, 17(4):411-420.