Literature DB >> 21286805

Predicting biological impairment from habitat assessments.

Jason C Doll1.   

Abstract

The goal of biological monitoring programs is to determine impairment classification and identify local stressors. Biological monitoring performs well at detecting impairment but when used alone falls short of determining the cause of the impairment. Following detection a more thorough survey is often conducted using extensive biological, chemical, and physical analysis coupled with exhaustive statistical treatments. These methods can be prohibitive for small programs that are limited by time and budget. The objective of this study was to develop a simple and useful model to predict the probability of biological impairment based on routinely collected habitat assessments. Biological communities were assessed with the Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI), and habitat was assessed with the Qualitative Habitat Evaluation Index. Two models were constructed from a validation dataset. The first predicted a binary outcome of impaired (IBI < 35) or non-impaired (IBI ≥ 35) and the second predicted a categorical gradient of impairment. Categories include very poor, poor, fair, good, and excellent. The models were then validated with an independently collected dataset. Both models successfully predicted biological integrity of the validation dataset with an accuracy of 0.84 (binary) and 0.75 (categorical). Based on the binary outcome model, 22 sites were observed to be impaired while the model predicted them to not be impaired. The categorical model misclassified 47 samples while only seven of those were misclassified by two or more categories. The impairment source was subsequently identified by known stressors. The models developed here can be easily applied to other datasets from the Eastern Corn Belt Plain to aid in stressor identification by predicting the probability of observing an impaired fish community based on habitat. Predicted probabilities from the models can also be used to support conclusions that have already been determined.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21286805     DOI: 10.1007/s10661-011-1874-4

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


  10 in total

1.  Impacts of urbanization on stream habitat and fish across multiple spatial scales.

Authors:  L Wang; J Lyons; P Kanehl; R Bannerman
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 3.266

2.  Determining probable causes of ecological impairment in the Little Scioto River, Ohio, USA: part 1. Listing candidate causes and analyzing evidence.

Authors:  Susan B Norton; Susan M Cormier; Glenn W Suter; Bhagya Subramanian; Edith Lin; David Altfater; Bernie Counts
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 3.742

3.  A methodology for inferring the causes of observed impairments in aquatic ecosystems.

Authors:  Glenn W Suter; Susan B Norton; Susan M Cormier
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 3.742

4.  A local-scale in situ approach for stressor identification of biologically impaired aquatic systems.

Authors:  C C Morris; T P Simon; S A Newhouse
Journal:  Arch Environ Contam Toxicol       Date:  2005-11-15       Impact factor: 2.804

5.  The biological condition gradient: a descriptive model for interpreting change in aquatic ecosystems.

Authors:  Susan P Davies; Susan K Jackson
Journal:  Ecol Appl       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 4.657

6.  Estimating and comparing diagnostic tests' accuracy when the gold standard is not binary.

Authors:  Nancy A Obuchowski
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 3.173

Review 7.  In situ methods of measurement--an important line of evidence in the environmental risk framework.

Authors:  Jim Wharfe; William Adams; Sabine E Apitz; Ricardo Barra; Todd S Bridges; Chris Hickey; Scott Ireland
Journal:  Integr Environ Assess Manag       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 2.992

8.  An EPA program for monitoring ecological status and trends.

Authors:  J J Messer; R A Linthurst; W S Overton
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  1991-04       Impact factor: 2.513

Review 9.  Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems.

Authors:  J A Swets
Journal:  Science       Date:  1988-06-03       Impact factor: 47.728

10.  Use of physical, chemical, and biological indices to assess impacts of contaminants and physical habitat alteration in urban streams.

Authors:  Catriona E Rogers; Daniel J Brabander; Michael T Barbour; Harold F Hemond
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 3.742

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.