USGS Science⌕ Search

Geology topics

Vincent H. Resh

Publications and source records attributed to Vincent H. Resh.

6 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2016

Detecting significant change in stream benthic macroinvertebrate communities in wilderness areas

A major challenge in the biological monitoring of stream ecosystems in protected wilderness areas is discerning whether temporal changes in community structure are significantly outside of a reference condition that represents natural or acceptable annual variation in population cycles. Otherwise sites could erroneously be classified as impaired. Long-term datasets are essential for understanding these trends, to ascertain whether any changes in community structure significantly beyond the reference condition are permanent shifts or with time move back to within previous limits. To this end, we searched for long-term (>8 years) quantitative data sets of macroinvertebrate communities in wadeable rivers collected by similar methods and time of year in protected wilderness areas with minimal anthropogenic disturbance. Four geographic areas with datasets that met these criteria in the USA were identified, namely: McLaughlin Nature Reserve in California (1 stream), Great Smoky Mountains National Park in Tennesse-North Carolina (14 streams), Wind River Wilderness Areas in Wyoming (3 streams) and Denali National Park and Preserve in Alaska (6 streams). Two statistical approaches were applied: Taxonomic Distinctness (TD) to describe changes in diversity over time and non-metric multidimensional scaling (MDS) to describe changes over time in community persistence (Jaccards Index) and community stability (Bray–Curtis Index). Control charts were used to determine if years in MDS plots were significantly outside a reference condition. For Hunting Creek, TD showed three years outside natural variation which could be attributed to severe hydrological events but years outside the natural-variation funnel at sites in other geographical areas were inconsistent and could not be explained by environmental variables. TD identified simulated severe pollutant events which caused the removal of entire invertebrate assemblages but not simulated water temperature shifts. Within a region, both MDS analyses typically identified similar years as exceeding reference condition variation, illustrating the utility of the approach for identifying wider spatial scale effects that influence more than one stream. MDS responded to both simulated water temperature stress and a pollutant event, and generally outlying years on MDS plots could be explained by environmental variables, particularly higher precipitation. Multivariate control charts successfully identified whether shifts in community structure identified by MDS were significant and whether the shift represented a press disturbance (long-term change) or a pulse disturbance. We consider a combination of TD and MDS with control charts to be a potentially powerful tool for determining years significantly outside of a reference condition variation.

Alaska, California, North Carolina, Tennesse, Wyom↗
USGS2013

Analytical approaches used in stream benthic macroinvertebrate biomonitoring programs of State agencies in the United States

Biomonitoring programs based on benthic macroinvertebrates are well-established worldwide. Their value, however, depends on the appropriateness of the analytical techniques used. All United States State, benthic macroinvertebrate biomonitoring programs were surveyed regarding the purposes of their programs, quality-assurance and quality-control procedures used, habitat and water-chemistry data collected, treatment of macroinvertebrate data prior to analysis, statistical methods used, and data-storage considerations. State regulatory mandates (59 percent of programs), biotic index development (17 percent), and Federal requirements (15 percent) were the most frequently reported purposes of State programs, with the specific tasks of satisfying the requirements for 305b/303d reports (89 percent), establishment and monitoring of total maximum daily loads, and developing biocriteria being the purposes most often mentioned. Most states establish reference sites (81 percent), but classify them using State-specific methods. The most often used technique for determining the appropriateness of a reference site was Best Professional Judgment (86 percent of these states). Macroinvertebrate samples are almost always collected by using a D-frame net, and duplicate samples are collected from approximately 10 percent of sites for quality assurance and quality control purposes. Most programs have macroinvertebrate samples processed by contractors (53 percent) and have identifications confirmed by a second taxonomist (85 percent). All States collect habitat data, with most using the Rapid Bioassessment Protocol visual-assessment approach, which requires ~1 h/site. Dissolved oxygen, pH, and conductivity are measured in more than 90 percent of programs. Wide variation exists in which taxa are excluded from analyses and the level of taxonomic resolution used. Species traits, such as functional feeding groups, are commonly used (96 percent), as are tolerance values for organic pollution (87 percent). Less often used are tolerance values for metals (28 percent). Benthic data are infrequently modified (34 percent) prior to analysis. Fixed-count subsampling is used widely (83 percent), with the number of organisms sorted ranging from 100 to 600 specimens. Most programs include a step during sample processing to acquire rare taxa (79 percent). Programs calculate from 2 to more than100 different metrics (mean 20), and most formulate a multimetric index (87 percent). Eleven of the 112 metrics reported represent 50 percent of all metrics considered to be useful, and most of these are based on richness or percent composition. Biotic indices and tolerance metrics are most oftenused in the eastern U.S., and functional and habitat-type metrics are most often used in the western U.S. Sixty-nine percent of programs analyze their data in-house, typically performing correlations and regressions, and few use any form of data transformation (34 percent). Fifty-one percent of the programs use multivariate analyses, typically non-metric multi-dimensional scaling. All programs have electronic data storage. Most programs use the Integrated Taxonomic Information System (75 percent) for nomenclature and to update historical data (78 percent). State procedures represent a diversity of biomonitoring approaches which likely compromises comparability among programs. A national-state consensus is needed for: (1) developing methods for the identification of reference conditions and reference sites, (2) standardization in determining and reporting species richness, (3) testing and documenting both the theoretical and mechanistic basis of often-used metrics, (4) development of properly replicated point-source study designs, and (5) curation of benthic macroinvertebrate data, including reference and voucher collections, for successful evaluation of future environmental changes.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2001

After site selection and before data analysis: sampling, sorting, and laboratory procedures used in stream benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring programs by USA state agencies

A survey of methods used by US state agencies for collecting and processing benthic macroinvertebrate samples from streams was conducted by questionnaire; 90 responses were received and used to describe trends in methods. The responses represented an estimated 13,000-15,000 samples collected and processed per year. Kicknet devices were used in 64.5% of the methods; other sampling devices included fixed-area samplers (Surber and Hess), artificial substrates (Hester-Dendy and rock baskets), grabs, and dipnets. Regional differences existed, e.g., the 1-m kicknet was used more often in the eastern US than in the western US. Mesh sizes varied among programs but 80.2% of the methods used a mesh size between 500 and 600 (mu or u)m. Mesh size variations within US Environmental Protection Agency regions were large, with size differences ranging from 100 to 700 (mu or u)m. Most samples collected were composites; the mean area sampled was 1.7 m 2 . Samples rarely were collected using a random method (4.7%); most samples (70.6%) were collected using "expert opinion", which may make data obtained operator-specific. Only 26.3% of the methods sorted all the organisms from a sample; the remainder subsampled in the laboratory. The most common method of subsampling was to remove 100 organisms (range = 100-550). The magnification used for sorting ranged from 1 (sorting by eye) to 30x, which results in inconsistent separation of macroinvertebrates from detritus. In addition to subsampling, 53% of the methods sorted large/rare organisms from a sample. The taxonomic level used for identifying organisms varied among taxa; Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera were generally identified to a finer taxonomic resolution (genus and species) than other taxa. Because there currently exists a large range of field and laboratory methods used by state programs, calibration among all programs to increase data comparability would be exceptionally challenging. However, because many techniques are shared among methods, limited testing could be designed to evaluate whether procedural differences affect the ability to determine levels of environmental impairment using benthic macroinvertebrate communities.

Journal of the North American Benthological Societ↗