Search

The level of sampling effort required to characterize fish assemblage condition in a river for the purposes of bioassessment may be estimated via different approaches. However, the goal with any approach is to determine the minimum level of effort necessary to reach some specific level of confidence in the assessment. In the Ohio River, condition is estimated and reported primarily at the level of pools defined by lock and dam structures. The goal of this study was to determine the minimum level of sampling effort required to adequately characterize pools in the Ohio River for the purpose of bioassessment. We followed two approaches to estimating required sampling effort using fish assemblage data from a long-term intensive survey across a number of Ohio River pools. First, we estimated the number of samples beyond which variation in the multimetric Ohio River Fish Index (ORFIn) leveled off. Then, we determined the number of samples necessary to collect approximately 90% of the fish species observed across all samples collected within the pool. For both approaches, approximately 15 samples were adequate to reduce variation in IBI scores to acceptable levels and to capture 90% of observed species in a pool. The results of this evaluation provide a basis not only for the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission (ORSANCO) but also states and other basin commissions to develop sampling designs for bioassessment that ensure adequate sampling of all assessment units. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Data were collected from 60 boatable sites using an electrofishing design that permitted comparisons of the effects of designs and distances on fish assemblage metrics. Sites were classified a priori as Run-of-the-River (ROR) or Restricted Flow (RF). Data representing four different design options (i.e., 1000 and 2000 m for both single and paired banks) were extracted from the dataset and analyzed. Friedman tests comparing metric values among the designs detected significant differences for all richness metrics at both types of sites and for catch per unit effort and percent tolerant species at ROR sites. Richness metrics were generally higher for the two 2000-m designs than for the two 1000-m designs. When plotted against cumulative electrofishing distance, the percent change in metrics declined sharply within approximately 1000 m, after which metrics usually varied by less than 10%. These data demonstrate that designs electrofishing 1000 m of shoreline are sufficient for bioassessments on boatable rivers similar to those in this study, regardless of whether the shoreline is along a single bank or distributed equally among paired banks. However, at sites with depths greater than 4 m, it may be advisable to employ nighttime electrofishing or increase day electrofishing designs to 2000 m.

Bioassessment of nonwadeable streams in the United States is increasing, but methods for these systems are not as well-developed as for wadeable streams. In this study, we compared six macroinvertebrate field sampling methods for nonwadeable streams adapted from those used by three major programs: the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program-Surface Waters, the U.S. Geological Survey's National Water Quality Assessment Program, and the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Surface Water Biocriteria Program. We performed all six methods at 60 sites across four rivers and measured water chemistry and physical habitat at each site to assess abiotic conditon. Sites were divided into two groups: those influenced by navigational lock and dam structures (restricted flow, or RF) and those free-flowing or with lowhead dams (run-of-the-river, or ROR). Metrics based on passive Hester-Dendy artificial substrate samplers differed greatly from active sampling methods (i.e., using nets) but represented abiotic conditions well in both ROR and RF sites. Although metric values were similar across certain sampling methods, the metrics significantly correlated with abiotic variables varied among methods and between ROR and RF sites. These results emphasize that methods are not interchangeable, and the ability to detect certain stressors depends on sampling method.