The Index of Biological Integrity and the bootstrap: Can random sampling error affect stream impairment decisions?

Christine L. Dolph; Aleksey Y. Sheshukov; Christopher J. Chizinski; Bruce Vondracek; Bruce Wilson

doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2009.10.001

The Index of Biological Integrity and the bootstrap: Can random sampling error affect stream impairment decisions?

Christine L. Dolph, Aleksey Y. Sheshukov, Christopher J. Chizinski, Bruce Vondracek, Bruce Wilson

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

23 Scopus citations

Abstract

Multimetric indices, such as the Index of Biological Integrity (IBI), are increasingly used by management agencies to determine whether surface water quality is impaired. However, important questions about the variability of these indices have not been thoroughly addressed in the scientific literature. In this study, we used a bootstrap approach to quantify variability associated with fish IBIs developed for streams in two Minnesota river basins. We further placed this variability into a management context by comparing it to impairment thresholds currently used in water quality determinations for Minnesota streams. We found that 95% confidence intervals ranged as high as 40 points for IBIs scored on a 0-100 point scale. However, on average, 90% of IBI scores calculated from bootstrap replicate samples for a given stream site yielded the same impairment status as the original IBI score. We suggest that sampling variability in IBI scores is related to both the number of fish and the number of rare taxa in a field collection. A comparison of the effects of different scoring methods on IBI variability indicates that a continuous scoring method may reduce the amount of bias in IBI scores.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	527-537
Number of pages	11
Journal	Ecological Indicators
Volume	10
Issue number	2
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2009.10.001
State	Published - Mar 2010

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
The authors thank David Wright and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources for funding this research, and Scott Niemela, Joel Chirhart, and Mike Feist and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency for providing biomonitoring data, IBI scoring criteria, and assistance in developing and carrying out project objectives. We also thank Leska Fore, Scott Niemela, and two anonymous reviewers for highly constructive reviews of this manuscript. The use of trade, product, industry or firm names or products or software or models, whether commercially available or not, is for informative purposes only and does not constitute an endorsement by the U.S. Government or the U.S. Geological Survey.

Keywords

Bioassessment
Fish
Multimetric
Nonparametric
Rare
Streams
Variability

Publisher link

10.1016/j.ecolind.2009.10.001

Find It

Find It at U of M Libraries

Cite this

@article{52ae199d53ac447880c06905d0f31665,

title = "The Index of Biological Integrity and the bootstrap: Can random sampling error affect stream impairment decisions?",

abstract = "Multimetric indices, such as the Index of Biological Integrity (IBI), are increasingly used by management agencies to determine whether surface water quality is impaired. However, important questions about the variability of these indices have not been thoroughly addressed in the scientific literature. In this study, we used a bootstrap approach to quantify variability associated with fish IBIs developed for streams in two Minnesota river basins. We further placed this variability into a management context by comparing it to impairment thresholds currently used in water quality determinations for Minnesota streams. We found that 95% confidence intervals ranged as high as 40 points for IBIs scored on a 0-100 point scale. However, on average, 90% of IBI scores calculated from bootstrap replicate samples for a given stream site yielded the same impairment status as the original IBI score. We suggest that sampling variability in IBI scores is related to both the number of fish and the number of rare taxa in a field collection. A comparison of the effects of different scoring methods on IBI variability indicates that a continuous scoring method may reduce the amount of bias in IBI scores.",

keywords = "Bioassessment, Fish, Multimetric, Nonparametric, Rare, Streams, Variability",

author = "Dolph, {Christine L.} and Sheshukov, {Aleksey Y.} and Chizinski, {Christopher J.} and Bruce Vondracek and Bruce Wilson",

note = "Funding Information: The authors thank David Wright and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources for funding this research, and Scott Niemela, Joel Chirhart, and Mike Feist and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency for providing biomonitoring data, IBI scoring criteria, and assistance in developing and carrying out project objectives. We also thank Leska Fore, Scott Niemela, and two anonymous reviewers for highly constructive reviews of this manuscript. The use of trade, product, industry or firm names or products or software or models, whether commercially available or not, is for informative purposes only and does not constitute an endorsement by the U.S. Government or the U.S. Geological Survey.",

year = "2010",

month = mar,

doi = "10.1016/j.ecolind.2009.10.001",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "10",

pages = "527--537",

journal = "Ecological Indicators",

issn = "1470-160X",

publisher = "Elsevier",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Index of Biological Integrity and the bootstrap

T2 - Can random sampling error affect stream impairment decisions?

AU - Dolph, Christine L.

AU - Sheshukov, Aleksey Y.

AU - Chizinski, Christopher J.

AU - Vondracek, Bruce

AU - Wilson, Bruce

N1 - Funding Information: The authors thank David Wright and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources for funding this research, and Scott Niemela, Joel Chirhart, and Mike Feist and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency for providing biomonitoring data, IBI scoring criteria, and assistance in developing and carrying out project objectives. We also thank Leska Fore, Scott Niemela, and two anonymous reviewers for highly constructive reviews of this manuscript. The use of trade, product, industry or firm names or products or software or models, whether commercially available or not, is for informative purposes only and does not constitute an endorsement by the U.S. Government or the U.S. Geological Survey.

PY - 2010/3

Y1 - 2010/3

N2 - Multimetric indices, such as the Index of Biological Integrity (IBI), are increasingly used by management agencies to determine whether surface water quality is impaired. However, important questions about the variability of these indices have not been thoroughly addressed in the scientific literature. In this study, we used a bootstrap approach to quantify variability associated with fish IBIs developed for streams in two Minnesota river basins. We further placed this variability into a management context by comparing it to impairment thresholds currently used in water quality determinations for Minnesota streams. We found that 95% confidence intervals ranged as high as 40 points for IBIs scored on a 0-100 point scale. However, on average, 90% of IBI scores calculated from bootstrap replicate samples for a given stream site yielded the same impairment status as the original IBI score. We suggest that sampling variability in IBI scores is related to both the number of fish and the number of rare taxa in a field collection. A comparison of the effects of different scoring methods on IBI variability indicates that a continuous scoring method may reduce the amount of bias in IBI scores.

AB - Multimetric indices, such as the Index of Biological Integrity (IBI), are increasingly used by management agencies to determine whether surface water quality is impaired. However, important questions about the variability of these indices have not been thoroughly addressed in the scientific literature. In this study, we used a bootstrap approach to quantify variability associated with fish IBIs developed for streams in two Minnesota river basins. We further placed this variability into a management context by comparing it to impairment thresholds currently used in water quality determinations for Minnesota streams. We found that 95% confidence intervals ranged as high as 40 points for IBIs scored on a 0-100 point scale. However, on average, 90% of IBI scores calculated from bootstrap replicate samples for a given stream site yielded the same impairment status as the original IBI score. We suggest that sampling variability in IBI scores is related to both the number of fish and the number of rare taxa in a field collection. A comparison of the effects of different scoring methods on IBI variability indicates that a continuous scoring method may reduce the amount of bias in IBI scores.

KW - Bioassessment

KW - Fish

KW - Multimetric

KW - Nonparametric

KW - Rare

KW - Streams

KW - Variability

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=70449133414&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=70449133414&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ecolind.2009.10.001

DO - 10.1016/j.ecolind.2009.10.001

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:70449133414

VL - 10

SP - 527

EP - 537

JO - Ecological Indicators

JF - Ecological Indicators

SN - 1470-160X

IS - 2

ER -

The Index of Biological Integrity and the bootstrap: Can random sampling error affect stream impairment decisions?

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Publisher link

Find It

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this