Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Impact of habitat diversity on the sampling effort required for the assessment of river fish communities and IBI

  • Primary research paper
  • Published:
Hydrobiologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The spatial variation in the fish communities of four small Belgian rivers with variable habitat diversity was investigated by electric fishing to define the minimum sampling distance required for optimal fish stock assessment and determination of the Index of Biotic Integrity. This study shows that the standardised sampling distance of 100 m was not always sufficient to collect most species present. The required minimum sampling distance seems to be correlated with habitat diversity. In homogeneous streams, a mean sample distance of 282, 452 and 572 m is necessary to capture 80, 90 and 95% of all species present, respectively. In heterogeneous streams, these sample distances decrease to 217, 380 and 503 m. Hence, at least 300 m should be sampled to catch most species present with a single-pass sampling method. However, our results show that a 100 m sampling distance as presently used in the Flemish monitoring programs is sufficient to accurately describe the ecological quality since differences in IBI evaluation between adjacent stretches could at least for some rivers be explained by differences in habitat heterogeneity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Angermeier, P. L. & R. A. Smogor, 1995. Estimating number of species and relative abundances in stream-fish communities: effects of sampling effort and discontinuous spatial distributions. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 52: 936–949.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belpaire, C., R. Smolders, I. Van den Auweele, D. Ercken, J. Breine, G. Van Thuyne & F. Ollevier, 2000. An Index of Biotic Integrity characterizing fish populations and the ecological quality of Flandrian water bodies. Hydrobiologia 434: 17–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breine, J., I. Simoens, G. Haidvogl, A. Melcher, D. Pont, S. Schmutz & the FAME CONSORTIUM, 2005. Manual for the application of the European Fish Index – EFI. A fish-based method to assess the ecological status of European rivers in support of the Water Framework Directive. Version 1.1, January 2005: 81 pp.

  • Brooks, A. P., P. C. Gehrke, J. D. Jansen & T. B. Abbe, 2004. Experimental reintroduction of woody debris on the Williams River, NSW: geomorphic and ecological responses. River Research and Applications 20: 513–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruylants, B., A. Vandelannoote & R. F. Verheyen, 1986. The movement pattern and density distribution of perch, Perca fluviatilis L., in a channelized lowland river. Aquaculture and Fisheries Management 17: 49–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • CEN, 2003. Water quality – sampling of fish with electricity. CEN/TC 203, REF. EN14011: 2003 E: 16 pp.

  • CEN, 2005. Water quality – guidance on the scope and selection of sampling methods. ICS 13.060.70, REF EN 14962: 2005 E: 25 pp.

  • De Leeuw, J. J. & H. V. Winter, 2008. Migration of rheophilic fish in the large lowland rivers Meuse and Rhine, the Netherlands. Fisheries Management and Ecology 15: 409–415.

    Google Scholar 

  • Didier, J. & P. Kestemont, 1996. Relationships between mesohabitats, ichthyological communities and IBI metrics adapted to a European river basin (The Meuse, Belgium). Hydrobiologia 341: 133–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Directive 2000/60/EC, 2000. Directive of the European parliament and of the council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. Brussels, Belgium.

  • Fausch, K. D., J. Lyons, J. R. Karr & P. L. Angermeier, 1990. Fish communities as indicators of environmental degradation. American Fisheries Society Symposium 8: 123–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorman, O. I. & J. R. Karr, 1978. Habitat structure and stream fish communities. Ecology 59: 507–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grenouillet, G., D. Pont & J. M. Olivier, 2000. Habitat occupancy patterns of juvenile fishes in a large lowland river: interactions with macrophytes. Archiv für Hydrobiologie 149: 307–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, G. D., J. F. Dowd & M. Crawford, 1990. Assemblage stability in stream fishes: a review. Environmental Management 14: 661–671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heermann, L. & J. Borcherding, 2006. Winter short-distance migration of juvenile fish between two floodplain water bodies of the Lower River Rhine. Ecology of Freshwater Fishes 15: 161–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hohausová, E., G. H. Copp & P. Jankovský, 2003. Movement of fish between a river and its backwater: diel activity and relation to environmental gradients. Ecology of Freshwater Fishes 12: 107–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huet, M., 1954. Biologie, profils en long et en travers des eaux courantes. Bulletin Français de Pisciculture 175: 41–53. (in French).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huet, M., 1962. Influence du courant sur la distribution des poissons dans les eaux courantes. Revue suisse d’Hydrologie 14: 412–432. (in French).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, R. M. & A. T. Herlihy, 2007. Electrofishing distance needed to estimate consistent Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) scores in raftable Oregon Rivers. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 136: 135–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, R. M. & T. Oberdorff, 1999. Applications of IBI concepts and metrics to water outside the United States and Canada. In Simon, T. P. (ed.), Assessing the Sustainability and Biological Integrity of Water Resources Using Fish Communities. CRC Press LLC, Washington, DC: 62–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kadye, W. T. & C. H. D. Magadza, 2008. Trout induces a shift from preferred habitat types for indigenous species: the example of the indigenous catfish, Amphilius uranoscopus (Pfeffer, 1889), on an African montane plateau. Hydrobiologia 614: 329–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karr, J. R., 1981. Assessment of biotic integrity using fish communities. Fisheries 6: 21–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karr, J. R., 1993. Defining and assessing ecological integrity: beyond water quality. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 12: 1521–1531.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Karr, J. R. & D. R. Dudley, 1981. Ecological perspectives on water quality goals. Environmental Management 5: 55–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karr, J. R., K. D. Fausch, P. L. Angermeier, P. R. Yant & I. J. Schlosser, 1986. Assessing Biological Integrity in running waters: a method and its rationale. Illinois Natural History Survey, Special Publication 5: 28 p.

  • Karr, J. R., P. R. Yant, K. D. Fausch & I. J. Schlosser, 1987. Spatial and temporal variability of the Index of Biotic Integrity in three midwestern streams. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 116: 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koel, T. M., 2004. Spatial variation in fish species richness of the upper Mississippi River system. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 133: 984–1003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruk, A., 2007. Role of habitat degradation in determining fish distribution and abundance along the lowland Warta River, Poland. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 23: 9–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lester, R. E. & A. J. Boulton, 2008. Rehabilitating agricultural streams in Australia with wood: a review. Environmental Management 42: 310–326.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lyons, J., 1992. The length of stream to sample with a towed electrofishing unit when fish species richness is estimated. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 12: 198–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maloney, K. O., H. R. Dodd, S. E. Butler & D. H. Wahl, 2008. Changes in macroinvertebrate and fish assemblages in a medium-sized river following a breach of a low-head dam. Freshwater Biology 53: 1055–1068.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, L. L., S. L. Kohler, P. B. Bayley, D. M. Day, W. A. Bertrand, M. J. Wiley & R. Sauer, 1992. Influence of stream location in a drainage network on the Index of Biotic Integrity. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 121: 635–643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ovidio, M. & J. C. Philippart, 2002. The impact of small physical obstacles on upstream movements of six species of fish: synthesis of a 5-year telemetry study in the River Meuse basin. Hydrobiologia 483: 55–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paller, M. H., 1995. Relationships among number of fish species sampled, reach length surveyed, and sampling effort in South Carolina Coastal Plain Streams. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 15: 110–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paller, M. H., 2002. Temporal variability in fish assemblages from disturbed and undisturbed streams. Journal of Aquatic Ecosystem Stress and Recovery 9: 149–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, T. M., W. A. Hubert, F. J. Rahel & K. G. Gerow, 2000. Effort needed to estimate species richness in small streams on the Great Plains in Wyoming. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 20: 394–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pusey, B. J. & A. H. Arthington, 2003. Importance of the riparian zone to the conservation and management of freshwater fish: a review. Marine Freshwater Research 54: 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reid, S. M., G. Yunker & N. E. Jones, 2009. Evaluation of single-pass backpack electric fishing for stream fish community monitoring. Fisheries Management and Ecology 16: 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, J. S. & E. E. Herricks, 2008. Fish use of ecohydraulic-based mesohabitat units in a low-gradient Illinois stream: implications for stream restoration. Aquatic Conservation 18: 852–866.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seegert, G., 2000. Considerations regarding development of index of biotic integrity metrics for large rivers. Environmental Science and Policy 3: 99–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sindilariu, P. D., J. Freyhof & C. Wolter, 2006. Habitat use of juvenile fish in the lower Danube and the Danube Delta: implications for ecotone connectivity. Hydrobiologia 571: 51–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slawski, T. M., F. M. Veraldi, S. M. Pescitelli & M. J. Pauers, 2008. Effects of tributary spatial position, urbanization, and multiple low-head dams on warmwater fish community structure in a midwestern stream. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 28: 1020–1035.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stott, B., W. V. Elsdon & J. A. A. Johnston, 1962. Homing behaviour in gudgeon (Gobio gobio. L.). Animal Behaviour 9: 93–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tales, E. & R. Berrebi, 2007. Controls of local young-of-the-year fish species richness in flood plain water bodies: potential effects of habitat heterogeneity, productivity and colonisation–extinction events. Ecology of Freshwater Fish 16: 144–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teels, B. M., 2003. Technical Note: Fish Assemblages as Indicators of the Biological Condition of Streams and Watersheds. Wetland Science institute USDA-NRCS, Laural, Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Liefferinge, C., P. Seeuws, P. Meire & R. F. Verheyen, 2005. Microhabitat use and preferences of the endangered Cottus gobio in the River Voer, Belgium. Journal of Fish Biology 67: 897–909.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Liefferinge, C., P. Seeuws, P. Meire & R. F. Verheyen, 2006. Erratum: microhabitat use and preferences of the endangered Cottus gobio in the River Voer, Belgium. Journal of Fish Biology 68: 1313–1316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are very grateful for the advice and comments of T. Dillen, A. Dillen, P. Quataert and E. de Deckere. We also thank the anonymous reviewer for useful comments and improvements of this article. We thank D. Van Pelt, E. Struyf, R. Yseboodt and M. Van Gils for their assistance in the field, as well as the fishing team of INBO-Groenendaal supervised by D. Bombaerts and E. Vandeuren. This study was funded by the Ministry of the Flemish Community, VLINA 9901—Flemish Impulse Programme for Nature development D/2001/3241/261.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology, Ecosystem Management Research Group, University of Antwerp, Universiteitsplein 1c, 2610, Wilrijk, Belgium

    Chris Van Liefferinge, Tom J. S. Cox & Patrick Meire

  2. Agency of Nature and Forest, Province of Vlaams-Brabant, 3000, Leuven, Belgium

    Chris Van Liefferinge

  3. Research Institute for Nature and Forest, Duboislaan 14, 1560, Groenendaal-Hoeilaart, Belgium

    Ilse Simoens, Jan Breine & Claude Belpaire

  4. Department Aquatic Ecotoxicology, Institute of Ecology, Evolution and Diversity, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Siesmayerstrasse 70, 60323, Frankfurt am Main, Germany

    Christian Vogt

  5. Laboratory of Aquatic Ecology, Catholic University Louvain, Ch. De Beriotstraat 32, 3000, Leuven, Belgium

    Dirk Ercken

  6. Department of Applied Ecology and Environmental Biology, Ghent University, J. Plateaustraat 22, 9000, Ghent, Belgium

    Peter Goethals

  7. Centre for Estuarine and Marine Ecology, Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO-KNAW), Korringaweg 7, P.O. Box 140, 4400 AC, Yerseke, The Netherlands

    Tom J. S. Cox

Authors
  1. Chris Van Liefferinge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ilse Simoens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christian Vogt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tom J. S. Cox
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jan Breine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Dirk Ercken
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Peter Goethals
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Claude Belpaire
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Patrick Meire
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chris Van Liefferinge.

Additional information

Handling editor M. Power

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Van Liefferinge, C., Simoens, I., Vogt, C. et al. Impact of habitat diversity on the sampling effort required for the assessment of river fish communities and IBI. Hydrobiologia 644, 169–183 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-010-0110-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-010-0110-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation