Abstract
The level of sampling effort required to characterize fish assemblage condition in a river for the purposes of bioassessment may be estimated via different approaches. However, the goal with any approach is to determine the minimum level of effort necessary to reach some specific level of confidence in the assessment. In the Ohio River, condition is estimated and reported primarily at the level of pools defined by lock and dam structures. The goal of this study was to determine the minimum level of sampling effort required to adequately characterize pools in the Ohio River for the purpose of bioassessment. We followed two approaches to estimating required sampling effort using fish assemblage data from a long-term intensive survey across a number of Ohio River pools. First, we estimated the number of samples beyond which variation in the multimetric Ohio River Fish Index (ORFIn) leveled off. Then, we determined the number of samples necessary to collect approximately 90% of the fish species observed across all samples collected within the pool. For both approaches, approximately 15 samples were adequate to reduce variation in IBI scores to acceptable levels and to capture 90% of observed species in a pool. The results of this evaluation provide a basis not only for the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission (ORSANCO) but also states and other basin commissions to develop sampling designs for bioassessment that ensure adequate sampling of all assessment units.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Angermier, P. L., & Karr, J. R. (1986). Applying an index of biotic integrity based on stream-fish communities: Considerations in sampling and interpretation. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 6, 418–427. doi:10.1577/1548-8659(1986)6<418:AAIOBI>2.0.CO;2.
Bady, P., Doledec, S., Fesl, C., Gayraud, S., Bacchi, M., & Scholl, F. (2005). Use of invertebrate traits for the biomonitoring of European large rivers: The effects of sampling effort on genus richness and functional diversity. Freshwater Biology, 50, 159–173. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2427.2004.01287.x.
Chernick, M. R. (1999). Bootstrap methods: A practitioner’s guide. New York: Wiley.
Colwell, R. K. (2005). EstimateS 7.5 user’s guide. Retrieved January 2, 2008, from University of Connecticut Web site: http://purl.oclc.org/estimates.
Dauwalter, D. C., & Pert, E. J. (2003). Electrofishing effort and fish species richness and relative abundance in Ozark highland streams of Arkansas. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 23, 1152–1166. doi:10.1577/MO1-144.
Emery, E. B., Simon, T. P., McCormick, F. H., Angermeier, P. L., DeShon, J. E., Yoder, C. O., et al. (2003). Development of a multimetric index for assessing the biological condition of the Ohio River. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 132, 791–808. doi:10.1577/T01-076.
Etnier, D. A., & Starnes, W. C. (1993). The fishes of Tennessee. Knoxville: The University of Tennessee Press.
Hughes, R. M., Kaufmann, P. R., Herlihy, A. T., Intelmann, S. S., Corbett, S. C., Arbogast, M. C., et al. (2002). Electrofishing distance needed to estimate fish species richness in raftable Oregon rivers. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 22, 1229–1240. doi:10.1577/1548-8675(2002)022<1229:EDNTEF>2.0.CO;2.
Koenker, R., & Bassett, G. (1978). Regression quantiles. Econometrica, 46, 33–50. doi:10.2307/1913643.
Lapointe, N. W. R., Corkum, L. D., & Mandrak, N. E. (2006). A comparison of methods for sampling fish diversity in shallow offshore waters of large rivers. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 26, 503–513. doi:10.1577/M05-091.1.
Lyons, J. (1992). The length of stream to sample with a towed electrofishing unit when fish species richness is estimated. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 12, 198–203. doi:10.1577/1548-8675(1992)012<0198:TLOSTS>2.3.CO;2.
Lyons, J., Piette, R. R., & Niermeyer, K. W. (2001). Development, validation, and application of a fish-based index of biotic integrity for Wisconsin’s large rivers. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 130, 1077–1094. doi:10.1577/1548-8659(2001)130<1077:DVAAOA>2.0.CO;2.
Manly, B. F. J. (1997). Randomization, bootstrap, and Monte Carlo methods in biology. London: Chapman and Hall.
Meador, M. R. (2005). Single-pass versus two-pass boat electrofishing for characterizing river fish assemblages: Species richness estimates and sampling distance. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 134, 59–67. doi:10.1577/ft03-094.1.
Melo, A. S., Bini, L. M., & Thomaz, S. M. (2007). Assessment of methods to estimate aquatic macrophyte species richness in extrapolated sample sizes. Aquatic Botany, 86, 377–384. doi:10.1016/j.aquabot.2007.01.005.
Ohio EPA (1989). Addendum to: Biological criteria for the protection of aquatic life: Volume II: Users manual for biological field assessment of Ohio surface waters. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio Environmental Protection Agency.
ORSANCO (1994). Ohio river water quality fact book. Cincinnati, Ohio: Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission.
Pflieger, W. L. (1997). The fishes of Missouri. Jefferson City, Missouri: Missouri Department of Conservation.
Reynolds, L., Herlihy, A. T., Kaufmann, P. R., Gregory, S. V., & Hughes, R. M. (2003). Electrofishing effort requirements for assessing species richness and biotic integrity in western Oregon streams. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 23, 450–461. doi:10.1577/1548-8675(2003)023<0450:EERFAS>2.0.CO;2.
Sanders, R. E. (1992). Day versus night electrofishing catches from near-shore waters of the Ohio and Muskingum rivers. The Ohio Journal of Science, 92, 51–59.
Sanders, R. E., Miltner, R. J., Yoder, C. O., & Rankin, E. T. (1999). The use of external deformities, erosions, lesions, and tumors (DELT anomalies) in fish assemblages for characterizing aquatic resources: A case study of seven Ohio streams. In T. P. Simon (Ed.), Assessing the sustainability and biological integrity of water resources using fish communities (pp. 225–248). Boca Raton, FL: CRC.
Simon, T. P., & Sanders, R. E. (1999). Applying an index of biotic integrity based on great river fish communities: Considerations in sampling and interpretation. In T. P. Simon (Ed.), Assessing the sustainability and biological integrity of water resources using fish communities (pp. 475–506). Boca Raton, FL: CRC.
Smith, K. L., & Jones, M. L. (2005). Watershed-level sampling effort requirements for determining riverine fish species composition. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 62, 1580–1588. doi:10.1139/f05-098.
Smith, E. P., & van Belle, G. (1984). Nonparametric estimation of species richness. Biometrics, 40, 119–129. doi:10.2307/2530750.
Trautman, M. B. (1981). The fishes of Ohio. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Blocksom, K., Emery, E. & Thomas, J. Sampling effort needed to estimate condition and species richness in the Ohio river, USA. Environ Monit Assess 155, 157–167 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-008-0425-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-008-0425-0