Literature DB >> 15861987

Watershed-based survey designs.

Naomi E Detenbeck1, Dan Cincotta, Judith M Denver, Susan K Greenlee, Anthony R Olsen, Ann M Pitchford.   

Abstract

Watershed-based sampling design and assessment tools help serve the multiple goals for water quality monitoring required under the Clean Water Act, including assessment of regional conditions to meet Section 305(b), identification of impaired water bodies or watersheds to meet Section 303(d), and development of empirical relationships between causes or sources of impairment and biological responses. Creation of GIS databases for hydrography, hydrologically corrected digital elevation models, and hydrologic derivatives such as watershed boundaries and upstream-downstream topology of subcatchments would provide a consistent seamless nationwide framework for these designs. The elements of a watershed-based sample framework can be represented either as a continuous infinite set defined by points along a linear stream network, or as a discrete set of watershed polygons. Watershed-based designs can be developed with existing probabilistic survey methods, including the use of unequal probability weighting, stratification, and two-stage frames for sampling. Case studies for monitoring of Atlantic Coastal Plain streams, West Virginia wadeable streams, and coastal Oregon streams illustrate three different approaches for selecting sites for watershed-based survey designs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15861987     DOI: 10.1007/s10661-005-4774-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Monit Assess        ISSN: 0167-6369            Impact factor:   2.513


  8 in total

1.  Quantifying Urban Watershed Stressor Gradients and Evaluating How Different Land Cover Datasets Affect Stream Management.

Authors:  Nathan J Smucker; Anne Kuhn; Michael A Charpentier; Carlos J Cruz-Quinones; Colleen M Elonen; Sarah B Whorley; Terri M Jicha; Jonathan R Serbst; Brian H Hill; John D Wehr
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2015-11-27       Impact factor: 3.266

2.  Coupling GIS and multivariate approaches to reference site selection for wadeable stream monitoring.

Authors:  Kevin J Collier; Andy Haigh; Johlene Kelly
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2006-08-08       Impact factor: 2.513

3.  River-stream connectivity affects fish bioassessment performance.

Authors:  Nathaniel P Hitt; Paul L Angermeier
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2008-04-09       Impact factor: 3.266

4.  Addressing statistical and operational challenges in designing large-scale stream condition surveys.

Authors:  Melissa J Dobbie; Peter Negus
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2013-01-24       Impact factor: 2.513

5.  Using extirpation to evaluate ionic tolerance of freshwater fish.

Authors:  Michael B Griffith; Lei Zheng; Susan M Cormier
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2017-12-29       Impact factor: 3.742

6.  Integrating sentinel watershed-systems into the monitoring and assessment of Minnesota's (USA) waters quality.

Authors:  J A Magner; K N Brooks
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2007-05-16       Impact factor: 2.513

7.  Optimization of an ecological integrity monitoring program for protected areas: Case study for a network of national parks.

Authors:  Jérôme Théau; Simon Trottier; Patrick Graillon
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-09-19       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Regression Tree Analysis for Stream Biological Indicators Considering Spatial Autocorrelation.

Authors:  Mi-Young Kim; Sang-Woo Lee
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-05-13       Impact factor: 3.390

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.