Biomonitoring and Bioassessment Chapter 11. Biomonitoring Biomonitoring – use of a biological systems for the evaluation of the current status of an ecosystem.

Biomonitoring and Bioassessment

Chapter 11

Biomonitoring

Biomonitoring – use of a biological systems for the evaluation of the current status of an ecosystem Generally used to look at exposure and effects

Exposure – analytical measurement of a target compound within the tissue of a sampled organism (laboratory or natural environment)- DDT in adipose tissue, Hg in feathers or fur

Effects – using one or more levels of biological organization to evaluate the status of biological community (also called Bioassessment)

• Generally performed with little or no analytical determination of toxicants (biggest difference between exposure and effects)-

Biomonitoring

Can be used to verify fate models and estimates of biological hazard developed from laboratory or semi-field toxicity tests

Marine fish exposure chambers

Some uses of biomonitoring

Biomonitoring Tug of War

Specificity Reliability

Attributing an effect to a specific cause

Detecting all effects caused totoxicant exposure

Bioassessment

Evaluation of the status of biological community Assessment often done by survey Sampling design can be constructed to answer

questions of causation of effect

Bioassessment Case Study

Evaluation of Silviculture BMPs

Effectiveness of Silviculture Best Management Practices in

Protecting Stream Ecosystems in Arkansas

Sam McCord, Ph.D.And

Rich Grippo, Ph.D.

Environmental Sciences ProgramArkansas State University

Ecoregions and Study

Sites

1A

1C1B

2

3A3B

3C4B

4A

Study Design (BACI)

Before harvest vs. after harvestUpstream vs. downstreamMultiple seasonsTested with GLM Anova and PCA

ChironomidaeTrichoptera

PlecopteraEphemeroptera

Community characteristics examined

Total richness EPT richness % Dominant taxon % Diptera Hilsenhoff biotic index % Collectors % EPT % Ephemeroptera

% Plecoptera % Trichoptera % Chironomidae % Non-insects % Shredders % Scrapers % Filterers % Predators

Analysis of Variance model

Xijk = + i + k(i) + j + ()ij + ijk

where is the overall mean,

i is the effect of period (i = before or after silviculture activity),

k(i) represents sampling times within each period (k = winter or spring)

j is the effect of location (j = above or below silviculture site),

()ij is the interaction between period (before or after) and location (above or below),

and ijk represents the remaining error (variation) for each data point Xijk.

Were upstream vs. downstreamdifferences detected?

Yes No

Were differences related to sample design, orother non-silviculture circumstances?

YesNo

BMPseffective

BMPs noteffective

Summary

Seasonal variation was the primary source of variation in macroinvertebrate community characteristics

Annual variation was also important, primarily at the intermittent study streams, but did not appear related to silviculture activities

Upstream/downstream variation was less common, and appeared to be most associated with habitat differences between stations

Significant variation related to the interaction of study year and location was rare (6 of 112 possible results)

Conclusion

Best management practices applied in these harvestoperations were effective in protecting the ecologicalquality of adjacent streams