Effects of sampling error on bioassessments of stream ecosystems: application to RIVPACS-type models

被引:0
|
作者
Ostermiller, JD [1 ]
Hawkins, CP
机构
[1] Utah State Univ, Dept Aquat Watershed & Earth Resources, Logan, UT 84322 USA
[2] Utah State Univ, Ecol Ctr, Logan, UT 84322 USA
关键词
monitoring; collection methods; subsampling; macroinvertebrates; biological integrity; accuracy; bias; sensitivity; empirical models;
D O I
10.1899/0887-3593(2004)023<0363:EOSEOB>2.0.CO;2
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
We evaluated the influence of various sources of sampling error on the precision, accuracy, and sensitivity of bioassessments based on River Invertebrate Prediction and Classification System (RIVPACS)-type models. We used data from 98 minimally altered streams in western Oregon and Washington to generate 18 models representing 2 field collection techniques (fixed-area riffle and multiple-habitat collections) and 9 levels of subsampling (50, 100, ...450 fixed counts). For each model, we generated 2 observed-to-expected taxa ratios (O/E). The 1(st) O/E was based on all predicted taxa and the 2(nd) excluded rare taxa (i.e., those taxa with predicted probabilities of occurrence <0.5). We then compared O/E values to determine the extent to which subsampling effort, field collection method, different field personnel, and individual site characteristics altered model performance. We also generated O/E values for 63 streams with varying amounts of watershed and channel alteration (test sites) to quantify the extent to which sampling error influenced the sensitivity of these models in detecting biological impairment. Model precision improved with increased sampling effort. However, neither collection method consistently led to more precise models. Model accuracy generally was not affected by subsampling effort, sample collection techniques, or different sample collectors. However, similar to50% of the error in predictions was associated with unexplained characteristics of individual sites. Average assessment values across all test sites were robust to both collection method and subsampling effort. However, inferences about the biological condition of some test sites varied among models. Precision, accuracy, and sensitivity all improved with the exclusion of rare taxa, although O/E values for individual test sites were more variable among models based on different subsample counts when rare taxa were excluded from model calculations. Overall, we found that the effects of sampling error on RIVPACS model performance can be minimized by constructing models from subsamples of greater than or equal to350 individuals and by excluding rare taxa from calculations of O/E.
引用
收藏
页码:363 / 382
页数:20
相关论文
共 25 条
  • [1] Theoretical predictions of observed to expected ratios in RIVPACS-type predictive model assessments of stream biological condition
    Yuan, Lester L.
    JOURNAL OF THE NORTH AMERICAN BENTHOLOGICAL SOCIETY, 2006, 25 (04): : 841 - 850
  • [2] A comparison of the European Water Framework Directive physical typology and RIVPACS-type models as alternative methods of establishing reference conditions for benthic macroinvertebrates
    John Davy-Bowker
    Ralph T. Clarke
    Richard K. Johnson
    Jiri Kokes
    John F. Murphy
    Svetlana Zahrádková
    Hydrobiologia, 2006, 566 : 91 - 105
  • [3] A comparison of the European Water Framework Directive physical typology and RIVPACS-type models as alternative methods of establishing reference conditions for benthic macroinvertebrates
    Davy-Bowker, John
    Clarke, Ralph T.
    Johnson, Richard K.
    Kokes, Jiri
    Murphy, John F.
    Zahradkova, Svetlana
    HYDROBIOLOGIA, 2006, 566 (1) : 91 - 105
  • [4] Bootstrap simulations to estimate relationships between Type I error, power, effect size, and appropriate sample numbers for bioassessments of aquatic ecosystems
    Alden, Raymond W., III
    Hall, Lenwood W., Jr.
    JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND HEALTH PART A-TOXIC/HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING, 2020, 55 (13): : 1484 - 1503
  • [5] Effects of Land Cover on Stream Ecosystems: Roles of Empirical Models and Scaling Issues
    David L. Strayer
    R. Edward Beighley
    Lisa C. Thompson
    Shane Brooks
    Christer Nilsson
    Gilles Pinay
    Robert J. Naiman
    Ecosystems, 2003, 6 (5) : 407 - 423
  • [6] Effects of land cover on stream ecosystems: Roles of empirical models and scaling issues
    Strayer, DL
    Beighley, RE
    Thompson, LC
    Brooks, S
    Nilsson, C
    Pinay, G
    Naiman, RJ
    ECOSYSTEMS, 2003, 6 (05) : 407 - 423
  • [7] The effects of model parsimony and sampling error on the fit of structural equation models
    Cheung, GW
    Rensvold, RB
    ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH METHODS, 2001, 4 (03) : 236 - 264
  • [8] The Effects of Ranking Error Models on Mean Estimators Based on Ranked Set Sampling
    Akdeniz, Sami
    Yildiz, Tugba Ozkal
    REVSTAT-STATISTICAL JOURNAL, 2023, 21 (03) : 347 - 366
  • [9] An Application of a Small Area Procedure with Correlation Between Measurement Error and Sampling Error to the Conservation Effects Assessment Project
    Berg, Emily
    Mosaferi, Sepideh
    JOURNAL OF OFFICIAL STATISTICS, 2024, 40 (03) : 355 - 379
  • [10] Application of species distribution models in stream ecosystems: the challenges of spatial and temporal scale, environmental predictors and species occurrence data
    Domisch, Sami
    Jaehnig, Sonja C.
    Simaika, John P.
    Kuemmerlen, Mathias
    Stoll, Stefan
    FUNDAMENTAL AND APPLIED LIMNOLOGY, 2015, 186 (1-2) : 45 - 61