Use of Benthic Macro-Invertebrate Taxones as Biological Indicators in Assessing Water Quality of Erzeni River, Albania, During

Transcription

1 International Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences IJBAS-IJENS Vol:12 No: Use of Benthic Macro-Invertebrate Taxones as Biological Indicators in Assessing Water Quality of Erzeni River, Albania, During Erjola Keçi, Anila Paparisto, Bledar Pepa, Kledi Xhaxhiu Tirana University, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Tirana, Albania Contact person: Abstract The Erzeni River flows in an area with sandy clay deposits (Saraçi R., 1996). The geographical position and geologic composition of river basin have a specific study importance. This occurrence shows a close connection between habitat and benthic indicators and widely between hydrology and biodiversity. For the biological assessment of river water quality different groups of macro invertebrates are used. They are good indicators of biodiversity and habitat quality and their presence is closely connected with the general ecological status of the river ecosystem. (Lee N. 2003). Benthic macro invertebrates are determined as crucial elements and have a great importance in the biological assessment of water quality (Water Framework Directive - WFD). In this study the water quality results are given for the monitoring period from summer 2011 to summer 2012 in three sampling stations in Erzeni River, Albania. The paper presents the aquatic ecosystem situation based on data gathered on insect and invertebrate fauna. From the analyses of data is important to mention the presence of benthic sensitive organisms (Environmental Protection Agency- USA) in the sampling stations. Two other groups, benthic invertebrates with a medium tolerance toward pollution and tolerant taxons were present as well. The species richness pattern of Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera were significantly correlated with EPT and BI value. Index Term-- ETP, TV, water quality, EPT, BI index. I. INTRODUCTION In the transferring process and elaboration of organic material present in flowing waters, the benthic invertebrates have a double role of a direct consume (respiratory and alimentary) and fragmentation of particle in substances simple to assimilate from the bacteria component. Macro invertebrates circulate the preferred nutrition for numerous fish species. A variable macro benthic community, being able to use more efficiently the internal nutrition and adapt better to climate changes, is a guarantee for a good depurative efficiency. Water pollution and the alterations of fluvial ecosystems morphology in vertical and horizontal directions; influence the benthic macro invertebrates distribution and the possibility of fulfilling their lifecycle (Siligardi M. et al, 2000). Ecological water quality is closely related to the biological communities conditions. The biological elements of ecosystem are often damaged by anthropological activities, and those react acts by modifying or adapting their composition and structure (Simboura, 2008). Invertebrates role is known in relation to the ecosystem structure, and their function is associated with water surface, showing the ecological status of the river. Benthic invertebrates accumulate records of past conditions in their tissues. These records can sometimes be read and monitored more economically than would the records obtained by establishing stations that continuously monitor environmental conditions. Living organisms can increase the sensitivity of monitoring providing information on how pollutants affect macro invertebrate performance under natural conditions. For this assessment has been necessary to collect data related to the taxonomic communities composition, the abundance, the taxonomic diversity and sensitivity. Benthic macro invertebrates are a crucial component of water ecosystems. Among the macro invertebrates, Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera (EPT) are very important in assessing water quality as they show low tolerance toward water pollutants. These organisms are sensitive to environmental changes s that may occur in clean and well oxygenated waters. Therefore, EPT assemblages are frequently considered as good indicators for water quality (Rosenberg & Resh 1993). The main objective of this study is to biologically assess the water quality taking into consideration the presence, density and tolerance of benthic invertebrates. The analyses of macro invertebrates assemblages is also time and cost efficient compared to chemical and physical assessments of water quality (Bode et al, 1996), which provide little insight into the temporal variation of conditions. This study provides data mainly about the benthic invertebrates population level as indicators of water quality in the Erzeni River. Benthic invertebrates communities have been analyzed by measuring two important indexes based in the taxa density and tolerance values which are: the EPT value and Biotic Index value. The relations between the determinate values and water bioclassification have been also studied. II. METHODS AND MATERIALS The sampling of aquatic macro invertebrates has been carried out based on the methodologies suggested by Campaioli et al. (1994); Dowing & Rigler (1984); Lenat (1988); Barbour et al, 1999; Bailey et al, 2001; Bode et al, 1997). Benthic invertebrates were taken from the river bottom (40 60 cm) with a kick - net in order to gain sufficient samples from larger depths of water. The net is held upright on the stream bed by one individual, while the stream bottom upstream of the net is physically disrupted by a second individual. Kicking and

2 International Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences IJBAS-IJENS Vol:12 No: turning over rocks and logs with the feet and hands dislodges organisms which are washed into the net by the current. The samples were collected from areas presenting differing current speed. In very small streams or in sandy areas lacking riffles, kicks are taken from root mats, snags or bank areas. All types of benthic macro invertebrates were collected by this sampling device, but method emphasizes species that live in fast flowing water. This technique gives consistent results (Horning & Pollard, 1978; Armitage, 1978). It was used to gather good results during the investigations in three monitoring stations of Erzeni River, Mullet station one, Damjan - Fortuzaj station two and Shijak station three (Fig: 1). The monitoring stations were selected based on geographic expansion of Erzeni River flow and the relations between the river stations and surrounding urban areas, including the villages with a considerable number of inhabitants. The kick - net method takes the quantitative aspect into account, if the necessary experience is present (Pollard, 1981). In addition sampling plots were taken to be representative whereas within a station were taken three randomly samples, along spring, summer and autumn The field work is organized in daily expeditions, one for each season. To take one sampling plot are needed 30 sec and per each field trip are taken 3 of them in different stations. All benthic macro invertebrates are kept in 95% ETOH. Before mailing the jars are completely filled with alcohol to reduce damage to the specimen. They then are carefully packed with enough packing material to prevent breakage. Lab sheets and all the associated material is conserved in the laboratory. For the identification of benthic invertebrates are used different publications as Wallace and Wallace (2003), Edington & Hildrew (2005), Hickin (1967), Macan (1994), Hynes H.B.N (1993), Tachet et al. (1980) Cao et al. (1997), Parker and Salansky, (1998). After the identification, the data is saved in the correct format; total taxa richness, EPT taxa richness, and Tolerance value are automatically calculated. Fig. 1. Monitoring stations in Erzeni River. Station I: Mullet; Station II: Damjan Fortuzaj, Station III: Shijak III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION During the monitoring period from summer 2011 to summer 2012, in each of the stations, Mullet, Damjan-Fortuzaj and Shijak, a total number of 4448 individuals were collected. From these individuals, 1018 werefound in the first monitoring station, 1140 in the second and 2290 in the third station. Fig. 2 shows the percentage of benthic invertebrates individuals collected at each of the three monitoring stations. The highest percentage of individuals was found in the third station and the lowest in the first station. This occurrence is as Fig. 2. Individual percentage in each monitoring station result of geographical position of stations, climate factors and anthropogenic influence in the river basin and its benthic fauna. The high density of benthic invertebrates is an indicator of good conditions of the ecosystem. EPT index shows the total number of families identifies per each order of benthic invertebrates groups. The EPT value is calculated based on the families of three major groups of invertebrates (E Ephemeroptera, P Plecoptera and T Trichoptera, which are very sensitive to water pollution and any other change within the River and its basin. (Wallace et al.1996; Voeiz et al.2001; EEA, ), (Table: I). T ABLE I WATER QUALITY CLASSIFICATION BASED ON EPT VALUE (BODE ET AL.1996; 1997) EPT < > 10 value Water quality 51.48% Polluted Clean Good Very good The biological classification of water in all the three monitoring stations is done related to the EPT value and Biotic Index value, which is calculated based on sensitive invertebrates density and individuals tolerance values (EPT Biotic Index = (TV x D): Density; Schmiedt et al.1998; Somers et al.1998) (Table: II). Comparison between EPT classification and BI classification is valuable to demonstrate the water quality and the level of pollution impact in the River. T ABLE II 22.89% 25.63% St. I - Mullet St. II - Damjan St. III - Shijak BIOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATION BASED ON EPT-BIOTIC INDEX VALUE (SCHMIEDT ET AL.1998; SOMERS ET AL.1998) BI value > 6.50 Water quality No impact Medium impact High impact From the data gathered in the Erzeni River during the successive seasons of monitoring, including the sampling and

3 International Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences IJBAS-IJENS Vol:12 No: the analyses, the EPT and Biotic Index values for all sampling stations were calculated. Based on the indexes of water quality values for the Erzeni River basin, and taking into consideration the three separate sampling stations, the biological classification of the river (Table: III) was carried out. T ABLE III EPT AND BIOTIC INDEX VALUES; BIOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATION OF WATER IN THREE MONITORING SITES OF ERZENI RIVER Station EPT EPT - BI EPT - Classification Biotic Index - Bio- classification Mullet Clean No impact Damjan - Fortuzaj Good No impact Shijak Good No impact Based on the EPT value the first station is classified in different bio-class compared to the two other stations. The second and the third stations have not shown considerable differences in EPT value, so are classified in the same bioclass. EPT BI values related to each sampling station have shown no significant differences and classify the water of Erzeni River in the same bio-class as not impacted water. Based on EPT classification the water in the first station is slightly of a better quality rather than the other two stations. The difference in EPT value is influenced by the different climate conditions in the first station. The first station is located at a considerable distance from the inhabited areas and close to the origin of the river. Another classification of Erzeni River water, based on Stroud Water Research Centre method, is shown in the table below. Biotic index according to this method shall take into consideration the density and the tolerance value of all the macro invertebrates groups identified in the samples. S.W.R.C BI is based in detailed information of benthic communities identified in the monitoring stations and provides for a more exact bio classification of River water quality. T ABLE IV BIO-CALSSIFICATION OF LAKE WATER BASED ON BIOTIC INDEX VALUE ACCORDING THE STROUD WATER RESEARCH CENTER BI value < (S.W.R.C) Water quality Very good Good Medium Poor In the table below are shown the S.W.R.C BI values related the three sampling stations in Erzeni River during the monitoring period. T ABLE V BIOTIC INDEX VALUE AND BIOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATION OF WATER IN THREE MONITORING SITES OF ERZENI RIVER (STROUD WATER RESEARCH CENTER STATIO N S.W.R.C - BI BIO -CLASSIFICATIO N T ABLE VI BIOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATION OF WATER IN THREE MONITORING SITES OF ERZENI RIVER BASED ON S.W.R.C BI VALUES AND EPT VALUES From the table above the River water quality in the third station is classified in the same bio class based in both indexes. While the second and the first stations are classified in different bio classes based on few differences in indexes values. From all the calculations and analyses of the data collected in Erzeni River during we can conclude that the water quality of the river is still of a good quality. Based on the S.W.R.C BI values in the monitoring stations, the second station has a better water quality than the first and third monitoring stations. In general the three study stations do not show significant differences in indexes values, which mean no significant differences in water quality in all monitoring sites. Mullet 4.02 Good Damjan - Fortuzaj 3.41 Very good Shijak 3.97 Good STATIO N BIO - CLASSIFICATION S.W.R.C - BI BIO - CLASSIFICATION EPT Mullet Good Clean Damjan - Fortuzaj Very good Good Shijak Good Good IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS During the monitoring period from summer 2011 to summer 2012, in each of stations, Mullet, Damjan - Fortuzaj and Shijak, a total number of 4448 individuals were collected. From these individuals 1018 were found in the first monitoring station, 1140 in the second and 2290 in the third station. From the quantitative assessment of the data it results that the water quality in all selected sampling stations is classified in good water quality bio class. The differences

4 International Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences IJBAS-IJENS Vol:12 No: in water quality among different stations are due to climate factors, geographic position and anthropogenic influence. Based on the EPT value the first station is classified in different bio-class compared to the other two stations. The second and the third stations have not shown considerable differences in EPT value, so are classified in the same bioclass (Table: III). Based on the EPT BI values the water quality in all sampling stations is classified in the same bio class and considered as not impacted (Table: III & IV) by pollution. From all the calculations and analyses of the data collected in the Erzeni River during we can conclude that the water of the river is of a good quality. From the three sampling stations, the second station has the best water quality compared to the other, based on S.W.R.C BI calculations. In general the three study stations do not show significant differences in indexes values, which mean no significant differences in water quality in all monitoring sites. Future periodical and continuous monitoring in Erzeni River stations is recommended as the areas surrounding the Erzeni River are rapidly changing and shifting of the land uses.. Chemical analyses of water nutrition elements are necessary for water quality assessment, and determination of the levels of impact; Comparison among biological and chemical analyses is helpful to increase the efficiency of assessments Increase of the number of monitoring stations is recommended in the future. REFERENCES [1] Armitage PD, (1978) Downstream changes in the composition, numbers and biomass of bottom fauna in The Tees below Cow Green Reservoir and in unregulated Maize Beck, in the first years after impoundment. Hydrobiology 58, [2] Bailey RC, Norris RH, Reynoldson TB, (2001) Taxonomic resolution of benthic macroinvertebrate communities in bio assessments. J. North American Benthological Society 20, [3] Bernard N, Lenz S, Rheaume J, ( ). Benthic invertebrates of fixed sites in Western Lake Michigan Drainages, Wisconsin and Michigan. [4] Bode RW, Novak MA, Abele LA, (1997) Biological stream testing. NYS Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Water; Bureau of Monitoring and Assessment; Stream Monitoring Unit, USA. [5] Bode RW, Novak MA, L. A. Abele L., A. (1995) Quality assurance Work plan for biological stream monitoring in New York State. Department of Environmental protection, Division of water; Bureau of Monitoring and assessment; Stream Bio monitoring Unit, Albany, NY. [6] Campaioli S, Gheti PF, Minelli A, Ruffo S, (1994) Manuale per riconoscimento dei Macroinvertebrati delle acque dolci italiane. Provincia Autonoma di Trento , [7] Cao Y, Barl AW, Williams P, (1997), A comparison of clustering methods for benthic community analysis. Hydrobiologia, 347, [8] Cardoso CA, Solimini G A, Premazzi G, (2006): Report on Harmonisation of Freshwaters biological methods. pp EUR EN; Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities [9] Davis WS, Simon TP, (Eds.) (1995) Biological Assessment and Criteria: Tools for Water Resources Planning and Decision Making. pp: Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton. [10] Downing JA, Rigler FH, (1984) A manual on methods for the Assessment of secondary productivity in fresh waters, 2 nd Ed. p IBP Handbook No.17, Blackwell scientific Publications, Oxford. [11] Edington J.M, Hildrew A.G, (1995) A revised key to the caseless caddids larvae of the British Isles. With Notes on Their Ecology. Freshwat. Biol. Assoc., [12] EEA, (2007) European Environment Agency, EEA, , Technical report No. 11/2007, Halting The Loss of Biodiversity by 2010; Proposal for the first set of indicators to monitor progress in Europepp/17-22, 33-48, pp , [13] Hickin NE, (1967) Caddis larvae. Of the British Trichoptera, pp499. Hutchinson of London. [14] Horning CE, Pollard JE, (1978) Macro invertebrate sampling techniques for streams in semi arid areas. Comparison of the Surber method with a unit effort travelling kick method. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.EPA-600/ [15] Hutchinson GE, (1957) A treatise on limnology. Vol. 1, Geography, physics and chemistry. Wiley, New York. [16] Hutchinson GE, (1967) A treatise on limnology. Vol. 2, Introduction to lake biology and the limn plankton. Wiley New York. [17] URL 1, watershed_assesses.pdf [18] Hynes H.B.N. (1993). The ecology of running waters. The Blackburn Press: pp [19] Lake Data Assessment Workbook (2005), (a citizen guide to analyzing data to better understand lake conditions) Minnesota Pollution Agency, 4 th Ed. [20] Lampert W., Sommer U., Limnoecology; the ecology of Lakes and Streams; 2 nd Ed, University Press Oxford. [21] Lathrop JE, Markowitz A, (1995) Monitoring water resource quality using volunteers, Jn WS DaWis, [22] TP. Simons (Eds). Biological assessment and criteria; Tools for Water resource planning and decision making. pp Lewis publishers - Florida. [23] Lenat DR, (1998) Water quality assessment of streams using Qualitative collection methods for benthic macro invertebrates. J. North American Benthological Society 7, [24] Macan TT, (1994) A key to the British fresh and brackish- water gastropods. Freshwater Biological

5 International Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences IJBAS-IJENS Vol:12 No: Association. The Ferry house, Far Sawrey, Ambleside, Cumbria LA22 OLP. Scientific Publication No 11: pp.46. Fourth edition, 1977 (reprinted 1994), 46pp. ISBN [25] Moore JW (1979) Diversity and indicator species as measures of water pollution in a subarctic Lake. Hydrobiologia, 66, [26] Parker RCh, Salansky KG, (1998) Benthic Macro invertebrate Protocol Manual, p: 16. [27] Pollard JE, (1981) Investigator differences Associated with a kicking method for sampling macro invertebrates. J. Freshwater Ecology pp: [28] Rundle, S S. D., Robertson, A.L., A. L., Schmid-araya, J. M. (2002). Freshwater meiofauna. Biology and ecology. Blackhuys Publishers. Leiden: pp: [29] Siligardi M., Bernabei S., Cappelletti C.,2000. Indice di Funzionalita Fluviale. Manuale ANPA/2000. Agenzia Provinciale per la Protezione dell Ambiente. Provincia Autonoma di Trento. [30] Simboura N., Zenetos A. (2002). Benthic indicators to use in ecological quality classification of Mediterranean soft bottom marine ecosystems, including a new biotic index. Medit. Mar. Sci. 3/2, [31] Somers KM, Reid RA, Davis SM, (1998) Rapid Biomass assessments, how many animals are enough? J. North American Benthological Society 17, [32] Southerland MT, Stribling J.B, (1995) Status of biological criteria development and implementation. Pages in W.S. Davis and T.P. Simon (editors). Biological assessment and criteria: Tools for water resource planning and decision making. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, Florida. [33] Standart Methods for Examination of Water and Wastewater, APHA 1998 [34] Tachet H, Bournaud M, Richoux P, (1980) Introduction á l étude des macroinvertebres des eaux douces. pp: C. R.D.P. Lion. [35] UNECE - The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe [36] Voeiz NJ, Shieh S, Ward JV, (2001) Long-term monitoring of benthic macro invertebrate community structure. Aquatic ecology, 34, [37] Vinson MR, Hawkins CP, (1996) Effects of sampling area and sub sampling procedure on comparison of taxa richness among streams. J. North American Benthological society 15, [38] Wallace ID, Wallace B, (2003) Keys to the case bearing larvae of Britain and Ireland. Freshwater Biological Association. No.61.pp: 249. The Ferry house, Far Sawrey, Ambleside, Cumbria LA22 OLP. [39] Wallace JB, Grubaugh JW, Whiles MR, (1996) biotic indices and stream ecosystem processes. Results from an experimental study. Ecological Applications 6,