Abstract
Environmental agencies across the United States have searched for adequate methods to assess anthropogenic impacts on the environment. Biological assessments, which compare the taxonomic composition of an aquatic assemblage to relevant biocriteria, have surfaced as an effective method to assess the ecological integrity of US waterbodies. In this study, bioassessment data were collected and analyzed in conjunction with physical habitat and chemical stressor data for streams and rivers within the San Diego basin from 1998 through 2005. Physical stressors such as sediment loading, riparian destruction, and in-stream habitat homogenization affect many locations in the region. However, physical habitat measures alone were found to frequently overestimate the biological integrity of streams in the region. Many sites within the San Diego Basin, although unaffected by physical stressors, continue to exhibit low biological integrity scores. Sites with low biological integrity tend to possess higher specific conductance and salinity compared to sites with high biological integrity. We suggest that one possible reason for these differences is the source water used for municipal purposes.
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
Barbour, M. T., Gerritsen, J., Snyder, B. D., & Stribling, J. B. (1999). Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in Wadeable Streams and Rivers. Washington D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.EPA); Office of Water. Publication no. EPA 841-B-99-002.
Barbour, M. T., & Stribling, J. B. (1992). In G. Gibson (Ed.), Biological criteria. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.EPA); (EPA-440-5-91-005). Research and regulation, proceedings of a symposium, 12–13 December 1990, Arlington, Virginia. Office of Water, U.S. E. P.A. Washington, D.C.
Barbour, M. T., & Stribling, J. B. (1994). In Conference proceedings. Riparian ecosystems in the humid U.S.: Functions, values and management. National Association of Conservation Districts, Washington, D.C. March 15–18, 1993, Atlanta, Georgia.
California EPA (2011). Surface water ambient monitoring program: Methods. http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/swamp/tools.shtml#methods. Accessed 3 April 2011.
Copeland, C. (2002). Clean water act: Summary of the law. CRS Report for Congress. http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/laws/majorlaw/cwa.pdf. Accessed 1 August 2007.
Corder, G. W., & Foreman, D. I. (2009). Nonparametric statistics for non-statisticians: A step-by-step approach. New York: Wiley.
Dow, C. L., & Zampella, R. A. (2000). Specific conductance and pH as indicators of watershed disturbance in streams of the New Jersey Pinelands, USA. Environmental Management, 26(4), 437–445.
Ecolayers (2007). Advanced geospatial decision support tool. http://www.ecolayers.com. Accessed 1 August 2007.
Gullett, B. K., & Touati, A. (2003). PCDD/F emissions from forest fire simulations. Atmospheric Environment, 37, 803–813.
Harrington, J. M. (1999). California stream bioassessment procedures. Rancho Cordova: California Department of Fish and Game, Water Pollution Control Laboratory.
Hart, B. T., Edwards, R., Hortle, K., James, K., McMahon, A., Meredith, C., et al. (1991). A review of the salt sensitivity of the Australian freshwater biota. Hydrobiologia, 210, 105–144.
Hilsenhoff, W. L. (1987). An improved biotic index of organic stream pollution. Great Lakes Entomologist, 20, 31–39.
Herbst, D. B., & Silldorff, E. L. (2006). Comparison of the performance of different bioassessment methods: Similar evaluations of biotic integrity from separate programs and procedures. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 25, 513–550.
Karr, J. R., & Chu, E. W. (1999). Restoring life in running waters better biological monitoring. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
Kefford, B. J., Marchant, R., Schäfer, R. B., Metzeling, L., Metzeling, L., Dunlop, J. E., et al. (2011). The definition of species richness used by species sensitivity distributions approximates observed effects of salinity on stream macroinvertebrates. Environmental Pollution, 159(1), 302–310.
Kefford, B. J., Papas, P. J., Metzeling, L., & Nugegoda, D. (2004). Do laboratory salinity tolerances of freshwater animals correspond with their field salinity? Environmental Pollution, 129(3), 355–362
Kerans, B. L., & Karr, J. R. (1994). A benthic index of biotic integrity (B-IBI) for rivers of the Tennessee Valley. Ecological Applications, 4, 768–785.
Legendre, P. (2005). Species associations: The Kendall coefficient of concordance revisited. Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, 10(2), 226–245.
Marshall, S., Pettigrove, V., Carew, M., & Hoffman, A. (2010). Isolating the impact of sediment toxicity in urban streams. Environmental Pollution, 158(5), 1716–1725.
Mebane, C. A. (2001). Testing bioassessment metrics: Macroinvertebrate, sculpin, and salmonid responses to stream habitat, sediment, and metals. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 67, 293–322.
Meyer, C., Beer, T., & Muller, J. (2004). Dioxin emissions from brushfires in Australia. National Dioxins Program Technical report No 1. Australian Government Department of the Environment and Heritage, Canberra. http://deh.gov.au/settlements/publications/chemicals/dioxins/report-1/.
NRC (2001). Assessing the TMDL approach to water quality management. Committee to Assess the Scientific Basis of the Total Maximum Daily Load Approach to Water Pollution Reduction, Water Science and Technology Board, Division on Earth and Life Studies, National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. 20055.
Ode, P. R., Rehn, A. C., & May, J. T. (2005). A quantitative tool for assessing the integrity of southern coastal California streams. Environmental Management, 35, 493–504.
Paul, M. J., & Meyer, J. L. (2001). Streams in the urban landscape. Annual Reviews of Ecology and Systematics, 32, 333–365.
Plafkin, J. L., Barbour, M. T., Porter, K. D., Gross, S. K., & Hughes, R. M. (1989). Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in streams and rivers: Benthic macroinvertebrates and fish. U.S. EPA 440-4-89-001. Washington, D.C.
Pohlman, A., & Voss, K. (2008). Masters thesis. Evaluation of the biological integrity of streams in the San Diego hydrologic region. San Diego, California: National University.
Rehn, A. C., & Ode, P. R. (2007). Comparisons of targeted-riffle and reach-wide benthic macroinvertebrate samples: Implications for data sharing in stream-condition assessments. Journal of North American Benthological Society, 26, 15–31.
Rosenberg, D. M., & Resh, V. H. (1993). Introduction to freshwater biomonitoring and benthic macroinvertebrates. In D. M. Rosenberg, & V. H. Resh (Eds.), Freshwater Biomonitoring and benthic macroinvertebrates (pp. 1–9). New York: Chapman and Hall.
Stein, E., & Brown, J. (2009). Effects of post-fire runoff on surface water quality: Development of a Southern California regional monitoring program with management questions and implementation recommendations. Technical Report 598. Southern California Coastal Water Research Project. Costa Mesa, CA.
Stoddard, J. L., Peck, D. V., Olsen, A. R., Larsen, D. P., Van Sickle, J., Hawkins, C. P., et al. (2005). Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP): Western streams and rivers statistical summary. U.S. EPA. Office of Research and Development. Publication No. EPA 620/R-05/006. Washington, D.C.
U.S. Department of Interior (2005). Quality of water, Colorado River Basin. Progress Report 22. http://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/salinity/pdfs/PR22.pdf. Accessed 3 April 2011.
U.S. EPA (2002). Biological assessments and criteria: Crucial components of water quality programs. Report EPA 822-F-02-006. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
U.S. EPA (2006). Multimetric indices to prepare and analyze data. http://www.epa.gov/bioindicators/html/multimetric.html. Accessed 7 April 2007.
U.S. EPA (2007). Crucial components of water quality programs. http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/biocriteria/technical/brochure.pdf. Accessed 2 July 2007.
Viswanathan, S., Voss, K. A., Pohlman, A., Gibson, D., & Purohit, J. (2010). Evaluation of the biocriteria of streams in the San Diego Hydrologic Region. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 136(6), 627–637.
Walsh, C. J., Roy, A. H., Feminella, J. W., Cottingham, P. D., Groffman, P. M., & Morgan, R. P., II (2005). The urban stream syndrome: Current knowledge and the search for a cure. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 24(3), 706–723.
Wang, L., & Lyons, J. (2003). Fish and benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages as indicators of stream degradation in urbanizing watersheds. In T. P. Simon (Ed.), Biological response signatures (pp. 227–249). Boca Raton: CRC Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Voss, K.A., Pohlman, A., Viswanathan, S. et al. A study of the effect of physical and chemical stressors on biological integrity within the San Diego hydrologic region. Environ Monit Assess 184, 1603–1616 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-011-2064-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-011-2064-0