+ Site Statistics
References:
54,258,434
Abstracts:
29,560,870
PMIDs:
28,072,757
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Estimates and comparisons of the effects of sampling variation using 'national' macroinvertebrate sampling protocols on the precision of metrics used to assess ecological status



Estimates and comparisons of the effects of sampling variation using 'national' macroinvertebrate sampling protocols on the precision of metrics used to assess ecological status



Hydrobiologia 566: 477-503



The Water Framework Directive (WFD) of the European Union requires all member countries to provide information on the level of confidence and precision of results in their river monitoring programmes to assess the ecological status class of river sites. As part of the European Union project STAR, the overall effects of sampling variation for a wide range of commonly used metrics and sampling methods were assessed. Replicate samples were taken in each of two seasons at 2-6 sites of varying ecological status class within each of 18 stream types spread over 12 countries, using both the STAR-AQEM method and a national sampling method or, where unavailable, the RIVPACS sampling protocol. The sampling precision of a combination of sampling method and metric was estimated by expressing the replicate sampling variance as a percentage Psamp of the total variance in metric values with a stream type; low values of Psamp indicate high precision. Most metrics had percentage sampling variances less than 20% for all or most stream types and methods. Most national methods including RIVPACS had sampling precisions at least as good as those for the STAR-AQEM method as used in their country at the same sites; the main exceptions were the national methods used in Latvia and Sweden. The national methods used in the Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Poland and the RIVPACS method used in the UK and Austria all had percentage sampling variances of less than 10% for the majority of metrics assessed. In contrast, none of the metrics had percentage sampling variances less than 10% when based on either the Italian (IBE) method, which used bank-side sorting, or the Latvian national method which identifies only a limited set of taxa. Psamp was lowest on average for the two stream types sampled in the Czech Republic using either the PERLA national method or the STAR-AQEM method. Averaged over all stream types and methods, the three Saprobic-based metrics had the lowest average percentage sampling variances (3-6%) amongst the 26 metrics assessed. These estimates of sampling standard deviation can be used to help assess the uncertainty in single or multi-metric systems for estimating site ecological status using the general STAR Bioassessment Guidance Software (STARBUGS) developed within the STAR projec

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 012786438

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

DOI: 10.1007/s10750-006-0076-5


Related references

Effects of sampling and sub-sampling variation using the STAR-AQEM sampling protocol on the precision of macroinvertebrate metrics. Hydrobiologia ust; 566: 441-459, 2006

Variation of sampling precision with merchantability classes in relascope estimates of basal area. J. For, 56: 3, 218, 1958

Effects of sampling microhabitats with low coverage within the STAR/AQEM macroinvertebrate sampling protocol on stream assessment. Limnologica 38(1): 14-22, 2008

Inter-animal variation and its influence on the overall precision of morphometric estimates based on nested sampling designs. Journal of Microscopy 131(Pt 2): 147-154, 1983

The effects of sampling technique on the ecological characterization of shallow, benthic macroinvertebrate communities in two Newfoundland ponds. Hydrobiologia1: 31-39, 2002

Precision farming protocols. Comparison of sampling approaches for precision phosphorus management. Communications in soil science and plant analysis1(19-20): 2969-2985, 2000

Precision farming protocols. Part 2. Comparison of sampling approaches for precision phosphorus management. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 31(19/20): 2969-2985, 2000

Relative precision of stratified sampling, sampling with probability of selection proportional to size, and simple random sampling with ratio estimation. Environmetrics 2(4): 475-486, 1991

Bioassessment in ephemeral rivers constraints and challenges in applying macroinvertebrate sampling protocols. African Journal of Aquatic Science 38(1): 35-51, 2013

Effects of Sampling Technique on Precision Estimates for Water Quality Variables in Fish Culture Ponds. Journal of Applied Aquaculture 4(1): 1-18, 1994

Effects of trawl sampling variability on precision of acoustic abundance estimates of gadoids from the Barents Sea and the Gulf of Alaska. ICES (International Council for the Exploration of the Sea) Journal of Marine Science. February; 551: 86-94, 1998

Evaluating the precision of kick-sampling in upland streams for assessments of long-term change: The effects of sampling effort, habitat and rarity. Archiv fuer Hydrobiologie 155(2): 199-221, 2002

Macroinvertebrate metrics and their integration for assessing the ecological status and biocontamination of Lithuanian lakes. Limnologica - Ecology and Management of Inland Waters 43(4): 308-318, 2013

Comparison of macroinvertebrate community structure between two riffle-based sampling protocols in Wyoming, Colorado, and Montana, 2000-2001. U S Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 5117: i-v, 1-12, 2006

Monte Carlo simulations of benthic macroinvertebrate populations: estimates using random, stratified, and gradient sampling. Journal of the North American Benthological Society. September; 173: 324-337, 1998