Assessing Water Quality of the Yellow River with Benthic Macro-invertebrate Indices

doi:10.13209/j.0479-8023.2015.070

Abstract

Abstract: Different benthic macro-invetebrate indices tend to produce different results of river water quality. Finding out appropriate evaluation indices aimed at specific rivers is the premise of biological assessment. This paper compared two sets of macro-invetebrate survey datasets of the main stream of the Yellow River between 1980s, and 2008. Shannon-Wiener Diversity Index, Margalef Diversity Index, Simpson Diversity Index and Pielou Evenness Index, Biological Monitoring Working Party (BMWP), Average Score Per Taxon (ASPT), Goodnight- Whitley Modified Index (GBI), Family Biotic Index (FBI) and Biotic Pollution Index (BPI) were calculated and compared to evaluate the water quality in the Yellow River. The results showed that the number of macroinvertebrate species sharply reduced due to the water quality deterioration. A clear difference occurred among assessment results of nine macro-invertebrate evaluation indices, with relatively high correlations among part of the indices. Simpson diversity index and Pielou evenness index, ASPT, GBI and BPI shows high correlation with the natural environment factors, which suggested they are not suitable as evaluation indices for water quality assessment in the Yellow River. Shannon-Wiener Diversity Index, Margalef Diversity Index, BMWP and FBI can be used as the assessment indices for biological evaluation of water quality in the Yellow River.

Key words: macro-invertebrates, biological indices, biological assessment, the Yellow River

摘要： 应用大型底栖动物指数评价河流水质, 不同指数的评价结果差异较大。为了针对特定河流找到合适的评价指数, 基于黄河干流1980 年代和2008 年生态调查数据, 应用Shannon-Wiener 多样性指数、Margalef 多样性指数、Simpson 多样性指数、Pielou 均匀度指数、BMWP 指数、ASPT 指数、Goodnight-Whitley 修正指数(GBI)、FBI (Family Biotic Index)指数和BPI (Pollution Biotic Index)指数对黄河水质进行了评价。结果表明: 与1980 年代相比, 2008 年黄河大型底栖动物种类数大幅减少, 水质理化参数恶化; 这9 种底栖动物评价指数评价黄河水质状况差异明显, 部分指数之间存在较高相关性。Simpson 指数、Pielou 指数、ASPT、GBI 和BPI 因与部分自然环境因子存在较高相关性, 不适合作为评价黄河水质的指标; Shannon-Wiener 指数、 Margalef 指数、BMWP 和FBI 可作为黄河水质评价指标。

关键词: 大型底栖无脊椎动物, 大型底栖动物指数, 生物评价, 黄河

HUANG Xulei;LI Tianhong;JIANG Xiaohui. Assessing Water Quality of the Yellow River with Benthic Macro-invertebrate Indices[J]. Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Pekinensis, DOI: 10.13209/j.0479-8023.2015.070.

黄旭蕾;李天宏;蒋晓辉. 基于大型底栖无脊椎动物指数的黄河水质评价研究[J]. 北京大学学报（自然科学版）, DOI: 10.13209/j.0479-8023.2015.070.

References

[1] Kolkwitz R, Marsson M. Ökologie der pflanzlichen Saprobien. Berichte der Deutschen Botanischen Gesellschaft, 1908, 26: 505–519
[2] Kolkwitz R, Marsson M. Ökologie der tierischen Saprobien. Beiträge zur Lehre von der biologischen Gewässerbeurteilung. Internationale Revue der Gesamten Hydrobiologie und Hydrographie, 1909, 2: 126–152
[3] Simpson J, Norris R, Wright J, et al. Biological assessment of river quality: development of AUSRIVAS models and outputs // Wright J F, Sutcliffe D W, Furse M T. Assessing the biological quality of fresh waters: RIVPACS and other techniques. Oxford: Freshwater Biological Association, 2000: 125–142
[4] Cao Y, Hawkins C P. The comparability of bioassessments: a review of conceptual and methodological issues. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 2011, 30(3): 680–701
[5] 王备新, 杨莲芳. 大型底栖无脊椎动物水质快速生物评价的研究进展. 南京农业大学学报, 2001, 24(4): 107–111
[6] Hawkes H A. Origin and development of the biological monitoring working party score system. Water Research, 1998, 32(3): 964–968
[7] Chutter F. An empirical biotic index of the quality of water in South African streams and rivers. Water Research, 1972, 6(1): 19–30
[8] Chutter F. The rapid biological assessment of stream and river water quality by means of the macroinvertebrate community in South Africa. Pretoria: Progress Report to the Water Research Commission, 1994
[9] Karr J R. Assessment of biotic integrity using fish communities. Fisheries, 1981, 6(6): 21–27
[10] Kerans B L, Karr J R. A benthic index of biotic integrity (B-IBI) for rivers of the Tennessee valley. Ecological Applications, 1994, 4(4): 768–785
[11] Karr J R. Defining and measuring river health. Freshwater Biology, 1999, 41(2): 221–234
[12] Hilsenhoff W L. Use of arthropods to evaluate water quality of streams [R]. Madison, WI: Department of Natural Resources, 1977
[13] Hilsenhoff W L. Using a biotic index to evaluate water quality in streams [R]. Madison, WI: Department of Natural Resources, 1982 [14] Hilsenhoff W L. An improved biotic index of organic stream pollution. Great Lakes Entomologist, 1987, 20(1): 31–40
[15] Chen K, Hughes R M, Xu S, et al. Evaluating performance of macroinvertebrate-based adjusted and unadjusted multi-metric indices (MMI) using multiseason and multi-year samples. Ecological Indicators, 2014, 36: 142–151
[16] Angradi T R, Pearson M S, Bolgrien D W, et al. Multimetric macroinvertebrate indices for midcontinent US great rivers. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 2009, 28(4): 785– 804
[17] Helson J E, Williams D D. Development of a macroinvertebrate multimetric index for the assessment of low-land streams in the neotropics. Ecological Indicators, 2013, 29: 167–178
[18] 段学花, 王兆印, 余国安. 以底栖动物为指示物种对长江流域水生态进行评价. 长江流域资源与环境, 2009, 18(3): 241–247
[19] 张楠, 孟伟, 张远, 等. 辽河流域河流生态系统健康的多指标评价方法. 环境科学研究, 2009, 22(2): 162–170
[20] 王博, 刘全儒, 周云龙, 等. 东江干流底栖动物群落结构与水质生物学评价. 水生态学杂志, 2011, 32(5): 43–49
[21] 丁建华, 杨威, 金显文, 等. 赣江下游流域大型底栖动物群落结构及水质生物学评价. 湖泊科学, 2012, 24(4): 593–599
[22] 霍堂斌, 刘曼红, 姜作发. 松花江干流大型底栖动物群落结构与水质生物评价. 应用生态学报, 2012, 23(1): 247–254
[23] 王备新, 陆爽, 杨莲芳. 水质生物评价指数筛选: 以南京紫金山地区小水体为例. 南京农业大学学报, 2003, 26(4): 46–50
[24] 李斌, 杨扬, 乔永民, 等. 广东省 6 座水库及其入库河流底栖动物调查与综合评价. 生态科学, 2012, 31(3): 324–329
[25] 江晶, 温芳妮, 顾鹏, 等. 湖北清江流域胡家溪大型底栖动物群落结构及水质评价. 湖泊科学, 2009, 21(4): 547–555
[26] 卢东琪, 张勇, 蔡德所, 等. 基于干扰梯度的钦江流域底栖动物完整性指数候选参数筛选. 环境科学, 2013, 34(1): 137–144
[27] 刘录三, 李中宇, 孟伟, 等. 松花江下游底栖动物黄旭蕾等基于大型底栖无脊椎动物指数的黄河水质评价研究 561 群落结构与水质生物学评价. 环境科学研究, 2007, 20(3): 81–86
[28] 耿世伟, 渠晓东, 张远, 等. 大型底栖动物生物评价指数比较与应用. 环境科学, 2012, 33(7): 2281– 2287
[29] 颜京松, 游贤文, 苑省三. 以底栖动物评价甘肃境内黄河干支流枯水期的水质. 环境科学, 1980, 1(14): 14–20
[30] 金德美 , 宋玉珍. 利用底栖生物评价黄河上游永靖兰州段水质污染的研究. 甘肃环境研究与监测, 1991(1): 32–37
[31] 何志辉, 谢祚浑, 史为良. 黄河水系渔业资源. 沈阳: 辽宁科技出版杜, 1986
[32] Shannon C E, Weaver W. The mathematical theory of communication. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press, 1949
[33] Margalef R. Information theory in ecology. General Systems: Yearbook of the International Society for the Systems Sciences, 1958, 3: 3671
[34] Simpson E H. Measurement of diversity. Nature, 1949, 163: 688–690
[35] Pielou E C. Ecological diversity. New York: Wiley, 1975
[36] Wright J, Armitage P, Furse M, et al. Prediction of invertebrate communities using stream measurements. Regulated Rivers: Research & Management, 1989, 4(2): 147–155
[37] Hilsenhoff W L. Rapid field assessment of organic pollution with a family-level biotic index. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 1988, 7(1): 65–68
[38] 段学花, 王兆印, 徐梦珍. 底栖动物与河流生态评价. 北京: 清华大学出版社, 2010
[39] 刘玉, Vermaat J E, de Ruyter E D, et al. 珠江、流溪河大型底栖动物分布和氮磷因子的相关分析. 中山大学学报: 自然科学版, 2003, 42(1): 95–99
[40] 蒋晓辉, 王洪铸. 黄河干流水生态系统结构特征沿程变化及其健康评价. 水利学报, 2012, 43(8): 991– 998
[41] 陈静生, 李荷碧, 夏星辉, 等. 近 30 年来黄河水质变化趋势及原因分析. 环境化学, 2000, 19(2): 97– 102
[42] 王建国, 黄恢柏, 杨明旭, 等. 庐山地区底栖大型无脊椎动物耐污值与水质生物学评价. 应用与环境生物学报, 2003, 9(3): 279–284
[43] 王备新, 杨莲芳. 我国东部底栖无脊椎动物主要分类单元耐污值. 生态学报, 2004, 24(12): 2768–2775
[44] 吴东浩, 王备新, 张咏, 等. 底栖动物生物指数水质评价进展及在中国的应用前景. 南京农业大学学报, 2011, 34(2): 129–134
[45] 朱迪, 郑海涛, 常剑波. 香格里拉岗曲河大型底栖动物群落和水质的快速生物评价. 水生态学杂志, 2009, 2(2): 56–66
[46] Goncalves F B, De Menezes M S. A comparative analysis of biotic indices that use macroinvertebrates to assess water quality in a coastal river of Parana state, southern Brazil. Biota Neotropica, 2011, 11(4): 27–36
[47] 苏华武, 江晶, 温芳妮, 等. 湖北清江流域叹气沟河底栖动物群落结构与水质生物学评价. 湖泊科学, 2008, 20(4): 520–528
[48] Soldner M, Stephen I, Ramos L, et al. Relationship between macroinvertebrate fauna and environmental variables in small streams of the Dominican Republic. Water Research, 2004, 38(4): 863–874
[49] Monaghan K A, Soares A. Bringing new knowledge to an old problem: building a Biotic Index from lotic macroinvertebrate traits. Ecological Indicators, 2012, 20: 213–220