1. Biomonitoring and assessment Why?

2. Ecological Society of America Demand Continues to Increase but we’re reaching a limit

3. Sadly - more why “One child dies every 15 seconds from the lack of clean freshwater” (> 2,000,000/year)

4. http://www.cwru.edu/artsci/engl/marling/60s/pages/richoux/Photographs.html Along with Silent Spring etc.

5. Clean Water Act (1972) Still an emphasis on chemistry

6. For many years following the passage of CWA in 1972, EPA, states, and Indian tribes focused mainly on the chemical aspects of the "integrity" goal. During the last decade, however, more attention has been given to physical and biological integrity. Also, in the early decades of the Act's implementation, efforts focused on regulating discharges from traditional "point source" facilities, such as municipal sewage plants and industrial facilities, with little attention paid to runoff from streets, construction sites, farms, and other "wet-weather" sources. Starting in the late 1980s, efforts to address polluted runoff have increased significantly. For "nonpoint" runoff, voluntary programs, including cost-sharing with landowners are the key tool. For "wet weather point sources" like urban storm sewer systems and construction sites, a regulatory approach is being employed. http://www.epa.gov/watertrain/cwa/ A Better Balance Between Chemistry, Biology, and Physical Habitat Additionally, increasing emphasis on “nonpoint”

7. FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) AN ACT To provide for water pollution control activities in the Public Health Service of the Federal Security Agency and in the Federal Works Agency, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, TITLE I—RESEARCH AND RELATED PROGRAMS DECLARATION OF GOALS AND POLICY SEC. 101. (a) The objective of this Act is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters. In order to achieve this objective it is hereby declared that, consistent with the provisions of this Act— FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT [As Amended Through P.L. 107–303, November 27, 2002] http://www.epa.gov/region5/water/pdf/ecwa.pdf The Clean Water Act

8. Effects of Toxic Substances in Surface Waters Most waste waters contain small amounts of chemical substances that with inadequate dilution or treatment may significantly impair survival potential of resident aquatic life. The capacity of rivers, lakes, and oceans to assimilate these wastes and toxic materials is not infinite, and serious water quality degradation is the inevitable result of the misuse and mismanagement of chemical resources. The 20th century witnessed substantial growth of the chemical industry. Millions of known chemical compounds exist, and an estimated 250,000 new compounds are synthesized each year. Of this number, it is estimated that approximately 1,000 new chemicals find their way into the environment annually as the end result of marketing, use, and disposal. The persistence and accumulation of hazardous substances such as pesticides and recalcitrant organics have resulted in the need for new and useful manufacturing containment and waste treatment procedures that will help protect aquatic life. http://www.fisheries.org/resource/page6.htm

9. But why not just measure chemicals? Too many –>1000 in the environment each year –Analytical detection is very low – but often not low enough Too little testing –Relatively little effects-testing of primary chemical –Even less of degradation products –Practically none on resident biota –Too many possible synergistic effects to test Chemicals in lotic systems are often transient.

10. Ken Bencala USGS Transient Presence

11. So, what is a pollutant? The introduction into the environment by humans of a substance or energy (e.g., heat) that will interfere with the natural processes or legitimate uses of that environment

12. Forms of Pollutants (Hynes) Inert –Sediments – e.g., from agriculture and forestry Poisons –Pesticides, acids, industrial wastes (metals), gender benders Inorganic reducing agents –Sulfides/sulfites – ↓ DO Oil –Toxicity, barrier to air breathers Organic residues –Sewage (human and animal) - ↓ DO, ↑ sedimentation Water temperature –Changes normal regime

13. But it’s just not pollutants it’s physical integrity as well Deviation in natural flow regimes and basin form and function Water capture and diversion Agriculture Forestry (Sub)urbanization Mining

14. Advantages of Biological Measures Integration –Temporal But … –Stressor type But … Often the measure in which society is most interested –How many fish!

15. Advantages of Evaluating Aquatic Invertebrates Ubiquitous Extremely species rich Sedentary (mostly) Long life cycles (relatively) Most often used –All states, multiple federal programs in many nations Extremely long history –Kolkwitz and Marsson (Saprobity) Cute

16. But – ongoing research is needed Integration? Other habitats (particularly large rivers) Cause and effect often speculative More basic biology/ecology is necessary Poor knowledge of natural distributions Better taxonomy (particularly e.i.) …  should keep us in work for a long time!

17. Scales of Monitoring (Biological levels) Biochemical/physiological Individual Population Community (assemblage) Ecosystem Each level generally has an associated temporal scale associated with it

18. Biochemical/Physiological Enzyme activity Respiration Metal partitioning –MBPs Crucial to our understanding of mode of action

19. Individual/Organism Deformities –Chironomidae –Gender-benders in fishes Behavior –Avoidance Life-history –Hatching success Sentinel organisms –Body burdens Warwick: midge deformities

20. Populations and assemblages More often used –Biotic indices The link that is often missing –High variance At least how we currently measure it/them

21. Community

22. Ecosystem Not often done –Expensive –Difficult to replicate But ELA Where we would like to be because –Evaluating processess not just structure and function Hubbard Brook: Likens et al. Experimental Lakes Area: Schindler et al. Mesocosms: principally lakes but: SNARL

23. Other methods Toxicity testing –Acute and chronic –Single species and multiple species –Laboratory and field (Clements) Paleolimnological Methods –Midge (and others) head capsules Sediment dating bioturbation

25. Community Better term – assemblage Why? – but we’ll use Community

26. But also - Why the “community” level? In most cases, save T&Es, there isn’t a single species with which we’re concerned –None identified as “diagnostic” of any given stressor and We’re not talking salmon here –High (possibly unmanageable variance) Rethink (i.e., test) different approaches –Evan Hornig Ubiquitous – yes, but we expect species turnover in space and time Used more often than any other level of biological organization

27. Are these two approaches different? Quantitative –Most studies in the US before 1989 (and some after)? –Collection “quantitative” –Relative small spatial scale –Replication But was it proper? –High resolution taxonomy Qualitative –Most studies post RBP –Collection “qualitative” –Much larger spatial scale –Considered un-replicated But probably replicated at the right spatial scale –Taxonomy likely less resolved But …not always What’s the question?

28. What’s the point? Describe a site (= sample unit) based on the species (or types) present and the distribution of individuals among these species. Compare and contrast between/among sites.

29. Types of measures Richness “Enumerations” Diversity Similarity Biotic indices “Functional” (e.g., FFGs) Combination = multimetrics Multivariate

30. Richness (=S) The most frequently used “single” measure –Often determined for a subset of the assemblage EPT –Considered less tolerant of “pollution” And – at taxonomic levels other than species Assumption is that S ↓ with ↑ impairment – but … –Variable in space and time Think of all the reasons we discussed –Extremely method sensitive Field – not well tested Lab – some testing Rarefied –We now know this but … No standard method –Lab and/or computer What is it’s meaning (Courtemanch) –An index of richness/evenness

33. Inflated richness as a function of sorted N

34. “Enumerations” “Simplest” measure –Total number of individuals – but … 0 – 100,000 m -2 (mean = 4000) –Therefore subsampling is necessary –↑ error –Total number of individuals within a group Taxonomic, FFG, etc. Often standardized to 100 = percentage composition –% within a group Taxonomic (e.g., % EPT) FFG (e.g., % shredders Ratios (% EPT/ (% Chironomidae +% EPT)) but … Expected response is a function of the hypothesized response of the group to the stressor –High temporal variability –Meaning ???

37. Diversity Was the summary measure of the ’60s and ’70s –Hurlbert (1971) rightfully questioned it’s value Still a part of many “multimetrics” Many, many different formulae –Shannon, Simpson, etc. –“Integrates” richness and evenness because 2 sites may have similar richness but extremely different distributions of individuals among the species …e.g., SpeciesABCDE 905311 40302064 Assumption is that diversity ↓ as impairment ↑ but … –Many factors influence the “diversity” of a site (= alpha diversity), such as … The species available in the region (gamma diversity) Productivity, habitat diversity, and all the factors we talked about that influence S

38. As an example: Shannon where, p i = the percentage of the ith species and there are n total species. Note that the identify of the species is not required – only the differentiation of one species from another. Diversity is often viewed in light of evenness (J),where

39. Highly correlated with S

40. Similarity Measures (my personal favorites) Can be based on: –Presence/absence data –Percentage composition –Abundance Objective: –As defined, evaluate the similarity between (more so than among) unimpaired vs. impaired sites. Assumption –↑ impairment ↓ similarity – but … Nasty to work with Difficult to summarize Often are non-linear with increasing difference But … again – seem more like what we “see” when we look at two pans of bugs!

41. where, a = the number of species in common, b = the number of species only in sample b c = the number of species only in sample c PS jk ­ = percentage similarity between sample j and sample k x ij = the abundance of species i in sample j x ik = the abundance of species i in sample k s = the total number of species in samples j and k Present in B and C Only present in B Present in C and B ab Only present in C cd Jaccard Coefficient and Percentage Similarity

43. Biotic Indices Numerous have been developed –Saprobien Index (Kolkwitz and Marsson 1909) Valences –In the US, the most often used measures are those developed by Hilsenhoff Family Biotic Index Modified for season, taxonomic level, etc. Methods are dependent on the assignment of (in)tolerance values Assumptions –↑ impairment (normally organic) ↓ or ↑ biotic index depending on how it is scaled –Tolerance values are rarely empirically derived Often the derivation and application are circular Tolerances principally represent response to organic pollution –Sensitive to taxonomic level

44. Weighted-average

45. Measures of “function” Functional feeding group –Should be based on method of food acquisition But often based on gut analysis –Problem with what is or is not assimilated Distinction between –FFG Scrapers, shredders, collector -gatherers and –filterers, predator … vs: –Trophic level Detritivore, herbivore, omnivore, carnivore Mobility or lack thereof –Clingers, sprawlers, swimmers, … Assumption –Response is some function of the disturbance –Most often based on % composition therefore sensitive to all those factors that can influence % composition temporally and spatially

46. Combinations (= multimetrics) First developed by Jim Karr for fish –Index of Biotic Integrity Based on the concept of economic indices –Regardless, the idea is that no single measure will indicate the status of a site therefore, it’s necessary to combine a number of different measures (=metrics) –Metrics are chosen that represent a range of response types (e.g., richness, % composition, diversity, ffg, biotic indices) They also are chosen to maximize differences between reference and impaired. –These individual measures are scaled and combined additively (most often) and then often rescaled to range from 1 to 10 Identifying impairment is based on a sites “value” relative to the established range Well … –If one measure is intractable – maybe adding up a bunch will make sense??? –It’s really not that bad – sorry. Go back to similarity slide

47. Multivariate Methods Oh my!

48. Multivariate Methods Using all the data simultaneously –Often both species and environmental

49. Multivariate Direct gradient analysis –Variation is species distributions are are determined Often then related to environmental variables Inference –Species distributions are used to infer environmental variables Temperature in Montana Indirect gradient analysis –Searches for gradients in species data which are interpreted in terms of environmental data Constrained ordination –Axes of variation in species data is constrained within the variation in environmental data.