Environment and Interdisciplinary Development

Current Issue

By Issue

By Author

By Subject

Author Index

Keyword Index

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Editorial Board

Publication Ethics

Indexing and Abstracting

Related Links

FAQ

Peer Review Process

News

Guide for Authors

Forms and Format Template

Reviewers

Evaluation of Agreement among Ecological Indices in Determining the Quality of Karaj River (Alborz Province)

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Research Center for Environment and Sustainable Development (RCESD), Department of Environment, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Introduction: The study of the structure of aquatic communities in aquatic ecosystems has a special place in the ecological studies of aquatic organisms. Among the important and common macrobenthic indices, we can mention uni- variate and multi-variate ecological indices, which having different advantages and disadvantages, are still used in various studies in riverian waters. In recent years, studies using biodiversity index and bioindices, especially the Helsinhof index, were used to assessment of the water quality of the Karaj River. Assuming that there is agreement between the ecological indices of the region, the present study evaluated the degree of agreement between the quality statuses results obtained from different ecological indices in the Karaj River.
Materials and Methods: In this study, we sampled macrobenthic fauna using a sorber sampler in nine stations during 2017-2018, seasonally. After separating and identifying macrobenthos, Shannon's index, EPT, ASPT, BMWP and HFBI were calculated. Then the ecological status of the stations was classified based on these indices. The percentage of stations whose ecological status was acceptable or unacceptable, as well as the compatibility level between these five indices in the study area, were calculated. To determine the similar tendency of the different indices in the classification of stations, the degree of correlation between them was determined using a non-parametric test. SPSS23 and Excel software were used for statistical analysis and Primer6 was used to determine biodiversity index. Shapiro-Wilk test was used to check the normal distribution of the data. In order to determine the significant difference between the desired data, one-way ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used at the significance level of p<0.05. ArcGIS 10.3 and Terrset 17.3 software were used to prepare maps using the IDW method.
Results: In terms of abundance, the Shironomide family was dominant. Baetis, Tubifex, Micrasema, Rhithrogena, Eporus, Hydropsyche, Leptophlebiidae, and Simulium made up 83% of the samples. The values ​​of H', EPT, ASPT, BMWP and HFBI were calculated (12.2±0.65), (5.6±2.8), (3.9±1), (48.8±23.34) and (4.6±1), respectively. The relative agreement in the results obtained from the five studied indices was seen in 67% of the stations with unacceptable quality in the case that 22% of the river stations showed complete agreement and 11% of the stations showed disagreement.  The statistical analysis shows that there is a significant agreement between the results of the ecological status obtained from EPT with ASPT, BMWP and Shannon, if they are different with HFBI index. Also, based on the results of the correlation between the classification of the ecological quality obtained from the bioindices (positive and strong correlation between the EPT and the Shannon and BMWP), it indicates the similar direction of these indices in the classification of the stations.
Discussion: There are structural and population changes of macrobenthos in aquatic ecosystems due to natural factors and human activities. Due to the lack of complete agreement between the assessment results of the five indices in this study, in order to use biological indices in each region for environmental management, there is a need to simultaneously use indices. Also, it is important to check the agreement between different indices and choose the appropriate ecological index. As a result, using each of these indices alone and without considering the above considerations can lead to wrong results. Based on the results of the present study, the Helsinhof index (HFBI) can be introduced as a more suitable index than other studied indices to assess the ecological status of the Karaj River.

Keywords

References
  1. Aazami, J., 2015. Feasibility of Fish and Macroinvertebrate Indices in Ecological Integrity Assessment of Tajan River and Relation to Habitat Parameters. PhD thesis. Faculty of Natural Resources. Tarbiat Modares University. 80 p. (in Persian).
  1. Abdoli, A., 2016. Assessment of aquatic resources behind the Karaj Dam and the rivers leading to it, Department of Environment, Provincial Directorate of Alborz (In Persian).
  2. Armitage, P.D., Moss, D., Wright, J.F. and Furse, M., 1983. The performance of a new Biological water quality score system based on Macroinvertebrates over a wide rang of unpolluted running water sites. Water Resrarch, 17, 333-347.
  3. Batley, G.E., Stahl, R.G., Babut, M.P., Bott, T.L., Clark, J.R., Field, L., Ho, K.T., Mount, D.R., Swartz, R.C. and Tessier, A., 2005. Scientific Underpinnings of Sediment Quality Guidelines, SETAC Press, pp.39-120.
  4. Blanchet, H., Lavesque, N., Ruellet, T., Dauvin, J.C., Sauriau, P.G., Desro, N., Desclaux, C., Leconte, M., Bachelet, G., Janson, A.L., Bessineton, C., Duhamel, S., Jourde, J., Mayot, S., Simon, S. and de Montaudouin, X., 2008. Use of biotic indices in semienclosed coastal ecosystems and transitional water habitats. Implications for the Implementation of the European Water Framework Directive. Ecological Indicators, 8 (4): 360-372.
  5. Bouchard, R.W.Jr., 2004. Guide to aquatic macroinvertebrates of the Upper Midwest. Water Resources Center, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN.208 pp.
  6. Cavanagh, N., Nordin, R.N. and Warrington. P.D., 1996. Freshwater Biological Sampling Manual. Water Management, Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Victoria, BC.
  7. Clarke K.R. and Warwick RM., 1994. Change in marine communities: an approach to statistical analysis and interpretation. Natural Environment Research Council, Plymouth Marine Biological Laboratory, Plymouth, UK.
  8. Czerniawska-Kusza, I., 2005. Comparing modified biological monitoring working party score system and several biological indices based on macroinvertebrates for water-quality assessment. Limnologist, 35(3), pp.169-176.
  9. Escalera Gallardo, C., López-López, E., Sedeño-Díaz, J.E., López Hernández, M., Arroyo-Damián, M.A. and Moncayo-Estrada, R., 2021. Water Quality Analysis in a Subtropical River with an Adapted Biomonitoring Working Party (BMWP) Index. Diversity, 13, 606. https://doi.org/10.3390/ d1311060.
  10. Ghorbanzadeh Zafarani, G., Machinchian Moradi, A., Darvish Bastami, K. and Fatemi, M., 2020c. Assessing the Classification Indices of Ecological Quality Status Using Benthic Macrofauna Identification in Gorgan Bay. Journal of Marine Biology, 12 (4):31-44 (In Persian).
  11. Ghorbanzadeh Zaferani, S.G., Hasani, N., Hosseini Tayefe, F. and Izadian, M., 2020b. Classification of Karaj river water quality based on EPT index, 1st National Conference on Biodiversity, Tehran, Iran (in Persian)
  12. Ghorbanzadeh Zaferani, S.G., Hosseini Tayefe, F., Azimi, S.B., Gandomkar, M., Gholamalifard, M. and Badamfiroz, J., 2021. Environmental Quality Assessment of Karaj River Sediments (Alborz Province), Iranian Fisheries Journal, 30(1): 37-52 (in Persian)
  13. Ghorbanzadeh Zaferani, S.G., Sari, A., Ebrahimi, T., Hosseini Tayefeh, F., Barzegar, S., Izadian, M., Ashja Ardalan, A., Hashemi Ana, S.K., Katouzian, A. and Badamfirouz, J., 2020a. Study of correlation between Macrofauna population and water quality status of Karaj River, Journal of Animal Environment, 12(4), 574-561. Doi: 10.22034/AEJ.2020.129548 (In Persian). 
  14. Gordon, N.D., McMahon T.A. and Finlayson, B.L., 1992. Stream Hydrology: An Introduction for Ecologists. John Wiley and Sons, N.Y., N.Y.
  15. Hawkes, H.A., 1997. Tacnical note: origin and development of the biological monitoring working party score system. Water Research 32, 964-968.
  16. Hilsenhoff, W.L., 1988. Rapid field assessment of of organic pollution with a family-level biotic index. Journa of the North American Benthological Societyl: 65-68.
  17. Horne, A.J. and Goldman, C.R., 1994. Limnology. Published by McGraw-Hill Book Co., Second Edition, 576 p. 
  18. Huang, Y.Y., Teng, D.X. and Zhao, Z.X., 1982. Monitoring Jiyunhe estuary pollution by use of macro invertebrate community and diversity index. Sinozoologia. 2, 133-146.
  19. Humpesch, U.H. and Fesl, C., 2002. The effect of river bed management on the habitat structure and Macro invertebrate's community of a ninth order river, in Austria. Archir fur Hydrobiology Large Rivers, 13(1), 29-46.
  20. Inyang, H.I. and Daniels, J.L., 2009. Environmental monitoring, UNESCO, Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (ELOSS) Publisher Ltd, oxford, UK, volume II
  21. Jalili, S., 2020. Water Quality Assessment Based on HFBI and BMWP Index in Karoon River, Khuzestan Province, (Northwest of Persian Gulf), Anthropogenic Pollution Journal, 4 (1): 36-49, DOI: 10.22034/ap.2020.1877482.1047. Available online at www.ap.iauardabil.ac.ir
  22. Jayachandran, P.R., Bijoy Nandan, S., Jima, M., Philomina, J., Don Xavier, N.D., Sreedevi, O.K., Prabhakaran, M.P. and Joseph K.J., 2019. Macrobenthic functional feeding groups in a microtidal monsoonal estuary (Kodungallur–Azhikode estuary, India), Regional Studies in Marine Science, 25, 100444.
  23. Jorgensen, S.E., Costanza, R. and Xu, F., 2005. Handbook of ecological indicators for assessment of ecosystem health. CRC Press.439p
  24. Kar, J.R. 1998. Rivers as sentile using the Biology to Guide Landscape Management Final re-port for usepa, 28p.
  25. Mahmoudi, M., 2013. Investigating macrobenthic indicators in order to investigate water pollution (case study of Shahristanak and Velayatrood of Karaj River), MSc Thesis, Faculty of Environment and Energy, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran (In Persian).
  26. Malvandi, H., Moghanizade, R. and Abdoli, A., 2020. The use of biological indices and diversity indices to evaluate waterquality of rivers in Mashhad, Iran, Biologia, 76(203):1-13.
  27. Mandaville, S., 2012. Benthic macroinvertebrates in freshwaters: Taxa tolerance values, metrics, and protocols, Citeseer.
  28. Musavi, M. and Pourebrahim, S., 2019. Water quality assessment based on biological monitoring of the Karaj River (Alborz province) using benthic macroinvertebrates, Journal of Animal Environment. 11(3): 335-344(in Persian).
  29. Norouzi, H. and Rezaeimanesh, M., 2021. The use of BMWP and ASPT indices to assessment the water quality of Hashilan wetland (Kermanshah, Iran). Wetland Ecobiology.12 (1): 47-64 (in Persian)
  30. Ochieng, H., Odong, R. and Okot-Okumu, J., 2020. Comparison of temperate and tropical versions of BiologicalMonitoring Working Party (BMWP) index for assessing waterquality of River Aturukuku in Eastern Uganda. Global Ecology and Conservation, 23 (8), 1183.
  31. Ogbogu, S. and Olajide S.A., 2002. Effect of sewage oxidation pond effluent on macroinvertebrate communities of a tropical forest stream, Nigeria, Journal of Aquatic Sciences, 17(1). DOI:10.4314/jas.v17i1.19906.
  32. Pazira, A.R., Salehi, H. and Obeidi, R., 2020. Identification and investigation of species diversity and richness of the Gastropoda in intertidal zone of Bushehr Port coastal area (the Persian Gulf waters), Iranian Journal of Fisheries Sciences, 18(2) 355-370.
  33. Pirali Zefrehei, A. and Ebrahimi, E., 2017. Introduction of Several Biological indices for  the Assessment of River Quality Water, Journal of Water and Sustainable Development, 3(2): 35-42 (In Persian).
  34. Plafkin, J.I., Barbour, M.T., Porter, K.D., Gross, S.K. and Hughes, R.M., 1989. Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in streams and rivers: benthic macroinvertebrates and fish. EPA, 444/4-89-001, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington DC.
  35. Shajan, K.P., 2001. Geochemistry of bottom sediments from a river-estuary-shelf mixing zone on the tropical southwest coast of India, Bulletin of the Geological Survey, Japan, 52(8):371-382.
  36. Shirchi Sassi, Z., 2012. Application of Macrobenthos Bio-Index for Water Quality Assessment: A Case Study of JajroodRiver, MSc Thesis, Institute for Environmental Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University (In Persian).
  37. Shokripour, Z. and Ashja Ardalan, A., 2017. Identify and evaluate the diversity of Macrobenthos in Karaj River. Journal of Animan Researches, 29(4): 676-682 (In Persian).
  38. Shokripour, Z., 2015. Identify and diversity of Macrobenthos in Karaj river. Islamic Azad University, Tehran medical branch, Faculty of modern medical science, Iran.129p.
  39. Webb, J.M. and Mccafferty, W.P., 2008. Heptageniidae of the World. Part II: Key to the Genera. Canadian Journal of Arthropod Identification, No.7. Doi: 10.3752/cjai.2008.07.
  40. WEP; West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, Field Guide to Aquatic Invertebrates, available at http://www.dep.wv.gov/sos
  41. Winterbourn, M.J. and Gregson, K.L.D., 1981. Guide to the Aquatic Insects of New Zealand. Entomological Society of New Zealand Bulletin: 5, 1-80
Environment and Interdisciplinary Development
Volume 7, Issue 76
June 2022
Pages 102-117
Files
Share
How to cite
Statistics